低磷胁迫下不同基因型棉花生理和形态的响应差异
|
摘要
盆栽条件下,选用18个不同基因型棉花品种,研究2个磷水平:适磷P(KH_2PO_4 1.00×10~(-3) mol·L~(-1))处理和低磷P 0(KH_2PO_4 0.01×10~(-3) mol·L~(-1))处理对棉花幼苗的磷利用效率、叶绿素含量、地上地下鲜重和干重及形态特性的影响。试验结果表明:棉苗地上部鲜重、地上部干重、总干重、总叶面积、叶绿素含量和磷利用率等指标在不同磷处理水平和不同基因型品种间都存在着显著或极显著差异,可作为研究品种耐低磷能力的性状指标;各性状相对值变异系数的大小顺序为:总叶面积>地上部干重>总干重>地上部鲜重>叶绿素含量>磷利用率;根据相对值表现及聚类分析表明:中棉所42号、新陆早19号和鲁研棉28号在低磷和适磷处理的比较中,各测定指标的综合表现良好,能够很好的适应低磷胁迫条件,属于耐低磷基因型品种。
18 cotton varieties with different genotypes were selected to study the effects of two phosphorus levels under pot culture condition.It was studied the phosphorus utilization efficiency,chlorophyll content,fresh and dry weight and morphological characteristics of cotton seedlings under phosphorous P(KH_2PO_4 1.00×10~(-3)mol·L~(-1)) treatment and low phosphorus P 0(KH_2PO_4 0.01×10~(-3)mol·L~(-1)) treatment.The results showed that there were significant or extremely significant differences in phosphorus treatment and varieties,such as the dry weight of the upper part,and the fresh weight of the upper part,the total dry weight,total leaf area,chlorophyll content and phosphorus utilization ratio of cotton seedling.The order of relative value variation coefficient of each trait was:total leaf area > dry weight of the upper part > dry weight > fresh weight of the upper part > chlorophyll content > phosphorus utilization ratio.According to the relative value performance and cluster analysis,the indexes measured in the comparison of low phosphorus treatment and suitable phosphorus treatment of No.42 of zhongmian suo,No.19 of xinluzao and No.28 of luyan mian were good,which could adapt well to the low phosphorus stress conditions and belonged to low phosphorus tolerance genotype.
18 cotton varieties with different genotypes were selected to study the effects of two phosphorus levels under pot culture condition.It was studied the phosphorus utilization efficiency,chlorophyll content,fresh and dry weight and morphological characteristics of cotton seedlings under phosphorous P(KH_2PO_4 1.00×10~(-3)mol·L~(-1)) treatment and low phosphorus P 0(KH_2PO_4 0.01×10~(-3)mol·L~(-1)) treatment.The results showed that there were significant or extremely significant differences in phosphorus treatment and varieties,such as the dry weight of the upper part,and the fresh weight of the upper part,the total dry weight,total leaf area,chlorophyll content and phosphorus utilization ratio of cotton seedling.The order of relative value variation coefficient of each trait was:total leaf area > dry weight of the upper part > dry weight > fresh weight of the upper part > chlorophyll content > phosphorus utilization ratio.According to the relative value performance and cluster analysis,the indexes measured in the comparison of low phosphorus treatment and suitable phosphorus treatment of No.42 of zhongmian suo,No.19 of xinluzao and No.28 of luyan mian were good,which could adapt well to the low phosphorus stress conditions and belonged to low phosphorus tolerance genotype.
引文
[1]宋世佳,孙红春,张永江,等.水培磷胁迫下不同基因型棉花苗期根系形态及叶片光合特性的差异[J].棉花学报,2015,27(3):223-231.
[2]陆景陵.植物营养学(上册)[M].北京:北京农业大学出版社,1994:171-174.
[3]严小龙,张福锁.植物营养遗传学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1997:8-197.
[4]王靓,盛建东,陈波浪.砂培条件下两种磷效率棉花根系形态及根际特征差异[J].中国土壤与肥料,2016(3):67-72.
[5]孙淼,李鹏程,郑苍松,等.低磷胁迫对不同基因型棉花苗期根系形态及生理特性的影响[J].棉花学报,2018(1):45-52.
[6]王斌.土壤磷素累积、形态演变及阈值研究[D].2014.
[7]王汝慈,程式华,曹立勇.水稻耐低磷胁迫研究进展[J].中国农学通报,2009,25(6):77-83.
[8]陈波浪,盛建东,蒋平安,等.不同基因型棉花磷效率特征及其根系形态的差异[J].棉花学报,2014,26(6):506-512.
[9]Lynch J P,Brown K M.Topsoil foraging- an architectural adaptation of plants to low phosphorus availability[J].Plant Soil,2001,237(2):225-237.
[10]董秋平,赵恢,张小芳,等.低磷胁迫下不同野生大豆的形态和生理响应差异[J].江苏农业科学,2017,45(9):79-83.
[11]李锋,潘晓华,刘水英,等.低磷胁迫对不同水稻品种根系形态和养分吸收的影响[J].作物学报,2004,30(5):438-442.
[12]李小兵,黎华寿,张泽民,等.水稻盐分胁迫研究进展[J].广东农业科学,2014,41(12):6-11.
[13]陈春泉.棉花叶面积测定新方法的研究与应用[J].中国棉花,1990(03):30.
[14]鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2007:268-270.
[15]张志良,瞿伟菁,李小芳,等.植物生理学实验指导[M].高等教育出版社,2010:10-34.
[16]李卫华,盛建东,陈波浪,等.棉花磷素养分高效利用品种的筛选[J].新疆农业大学学报,2010,33(2):109-115.
[17]李卫华.棉花磷素高效利用品种筛选及机理的初步研究[D].新疆农业大学,2010.
[18]王靓,盛建东,罗佳,等.不同基因型棉花磷效率的差异特征[J].中国土壤与肥料,2015(3):44-49.
[2]陆景陵.植物营养学(上册)[M].北京:北京农业大学出版社,1994:171-174.
[3]严小龙,张福锁.植物营养遗传学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1997:8-197.
[4]王靓,盛建东,陈波浪.砂培条件下两种磷效率棉花根系形态及根际特征差异[J].中国土壤与肥料,2016(3):67-72.
[5]孙淼,李鹏程,郑苍松,等.低磷胁迫对不同基因型棉花苗期根系形态及生理特性的影响[J].棉花学报,2018(1):45-52.
[6]王斌.土壤磷素累积、形态演变及阈值研究[D].2014.
[7]王汝慈,程式华,曹立勇.水稻耐低磷胁迫研究进展[J].中国农学通报,2009,25(6):77-83.
[8]陈波浪,盛建东,蒋平安,等.不同基因型棉花磷效率特征及其根系形态的差异[J].棉花学报,2014,26(6):506-512.
[9]Lynch J P,Brown K M.Topsoil foraging- an architectural adaptation of plants to low phosphorus availability[J].Plant Soil,2001,237(2):225-237.
[10]董秋平,赵恢,张小芳,等.低磷胁迫下不同野生大豆的形态和生理响应差异[J].江苏农业科学,2017,45(9):79-83.
[11]李锋,潘晓华,刘水英,等.低磷胁迫对不同水稻品种根系形态和养分吸收的影响[J].作物学报,2004,30(5):438-442.
[12]李小兵,黎华寿,张泽民,等.水稻盐分胁迫研究进展[J].广东农业科学,2014,41(12):6-11.
[13]陈春泉.棉花叶面积测定新方法的研究与应用[J].中国棉花,1990(03):30.
[14]鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2007:268-270.
[15]张志良,瞿伟菁,李小芳,等.植物生理学实验指导[M].高等教育出版社,2010:10-34.
[16]李卫华,盛建东,陈波浪,等.棉花磷素养分高效利用品种的筛选[J].新疆农业大学学报,2010,33(2):109-115.
[17]李卫华.棉花磷素高效利用品种筛选及机理的初步研究[D].新疆农业大学,2010.
[18]王靓,盛建东,罗佳,等.不同基因型棉花磷效率的差异特征[J].中国土壤与肥料,2015(3):44-49.