五个观赏海棠品种抗旱性比较

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2017.05.14

浙江农业学报 ›› 2017, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (5): 782-790.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2017.05.14

五个观赏海棠品种抗旱性比较

李春兰¹, 杨永花², 杨振坤², 王金秋², 廖伟彪^{1, *}

1.甘肃农业大学园艺学院,甘肃兰州 730070；
2.兰州市植物园,甘肃兰州 730070

收稿日期:2017-02-25 出版日期:2017-05-20 发布日期:2017-06-06
通讯作者: 廖伟彪,E-mail: liaowb@gsau.edu.cn
作者简介:李春兰(1992-),女,甘肃天水人,硕士研究生,主要从事园艺植物栽培生理与生态方面的研究。E-mail:1614549446@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(31160398,31560563); 中国博士后科学基金项目(20100470887,2012T50828); 教育部科学技术研究重点项目(211182); 教育部高校博士点新教师基金(201162020005); 甘肃省自然科学基金项目(1308RJZA179,1606RJZA073); 兰州市科技局攻关项目(2014-1-245)

Comparison on the drought-resistance of five ornamental crabapple cultivars

LI Chunlan¹, YANG Yonghua², YANG Zhenkun², WANG Jinqiu², LIAO Weibiao^{1, *}

1.College of Horticulture, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou 730070, China;
2.Lanzhou City Botanical Garden, Lanzhou 730070, China

Received:2017-02-25 Online:2017-05-20 Published:2017-06-06

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以5个观赏海棠品种王族、道格、粉手帕、粉屋顶和亚当为试材,在持续自然干旱条件下,运用隶属函数法,综合比较其抗旱性强弱。结果表明:干旱胁迫下,5个海棠品种的抗脱水能力由强到弱为:王族>粉手帕>道格>粉屋顶>亚当。亚当和粉手帕的叶绿素含量下降幅度最小;其次是王族;道格和粉屋顶的下降幅度最大。王族和亚当的游离脯氨酸积累最多,道格和粉屋顶游离脯氨酸积累次之,粉手帕积累最少;而粉屋顶和亚当的可溶性蛋白积累最多,显著高于道格、王族和粉手帕;道格和粉手帕的可溶性糖积累最多,粉屋顶最少。道格的丙二醛积累最高,王族、粉手帕和粉屋顶次之,亚当积累最少。超氧化物歧化酶活性表现为:亚当>粉屋顶>王族>道格>粉手帕;过氧化物酶活性表现为:王族>粉手帕>粉屋顶>道格>亚当;王族和亚当的过氧化氢酶活性均显著高于其他品种。隶属函数法综合评价结果表明,王族的抗旱能力最强,粉手帕、粉屋顶和亚当次之,道格最弱。

关键词: 观赏海棠品种, 干旱胁迫, 生理特性, 抗旱能力综合评价, 隶属函数法

Abstract: The drought resistance of five cultivars of Chinese flowering crabapple including Royalty, Dolgo, Hopa, Pink Spires and Adams was comprehensively evaluated by subordinative function method under continous drought stress. The results of the study revealed that the retention capability of five crabapple cultivars under drought stress decreased in the order of Royalty>Hopa>Dolgo>Pink Spires>Adams. The descend range of chlorophyll content of Adams and Hopa was the minimum; the second was the Royalty; the descend range in Dolgo and Pink Spires was the maximum. The free proline accumulation was the maximum in Royalty and Adams; the second was Dolgo and Pink Spires; Hopa was the minimum. The accumulation of soluble protein in Pink Spires and Adams was the maximum and significantly higher than that in Dolgo, Royalty and Hopa. The accumulation of soluble sugar in Dolgo and Hopa was the largest; Pink Spires was the least. The accumulation of malondialdehyde in Dolgo was the highest; the second was Royalty, Hopa and Pink Spires; Adams was the least. The activity of superoxide dismutase showed as follows: Adams>Pink Spires>Royalty>Dolgo>Hopa. The activity of peroxidase showed as follows: Royalty>Hopa>Pink Spires>Dolgo>Adams. The activity of catalase in Royalty and Adam was significantly higher than that of other cultivars. The drought resistances of 5 cultivars were comprehensively evaluated by subordinative function method and their drought resistances were shown to decrease in the order of Royalty, Hopa, Pink Spires, Adams and Dolgo.

Key words: ornamental cultivars of crabapple, drought stress, physiological characteristics, drought-resistant ability comprehensive evaluation, Subordinative function method

中图分类号:

S685.12

李春兰, 杨永花, 杨振坤, 王金秋, 廖伟彪. 五个观赏海棠品种抗旱性比较[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2017, 29(5): 782-790.

LI Chunlan, YANG Yonghua, YANG Zhenkun, WANG Jinqiu, LIAO Weibiao. Comparison on the drought-resistance of five ornamental crabapple cultivars[J]. , 2017, 29(5): 782-790.

参考文献

[1] 王婷.天津地区观赏海棠引种与筛选[J].北方园艺,2015(3):70-72.
WANG T. Introduction and screening of crabapple in Tianjin region[J]. Northern Horticulture , 2015(3):70-72.(in Chinese)
[2] 吴晓星,刘凤栾,房义福,等.36个欧美观赏海棠品种(种)应用价值的综合评价[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2015,39(1):93-98.
WU X X, LIU F L, FANG Y F, et al. A comprehensive evaluation on value of 36 Euro-American ornamental crabapples[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University( Natural Sciences Edition ), 2015, 39(1):93-98.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[3] 张往祥,魏宏亮,江志华,等.观赏海棠品种群的花期物候特征研究[J].园艺学报,2014,41(4):713-725.
ZHANG W X, WEI H L, JIANG Z H, et al. Studies on flowering phenological characteristics of ornamental crabapple cultivar group[J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica , 2014, 41(4):713-725.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[4] 王珍,王文和,张杰,等.主要观赏海棠品种的遗传多样性及其亲缘关系分析[J].果树学报,2014,31(6):1005-1016.
WANG Z, WANG W H, ZHANG J, et al. Genetic diversity and phylogenetic relationships analysis of major ornamental crabapple species[J]. Journal of Fruit Science , 2014, 31(6):1005-1016.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[5] 李欣,沈向,张鲜鲜,等.观赏海棠叶、果、花色彩的数字化描述[J].园艺学报,2010,37(11):1811-1817.
LI X, SHEN X, ZHANG X X, et al. Digital description of the ornamental crabapple's leaf, fruit and flower color[J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica , 2010, 37(11):1811-1817.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[6] 刘凤栾,房义福,孙居文,等.36种欧美观赏海棠生长与光合生理特性分析[J].植物生理学报,2013,49(8):738-742.
LIU F L, FANG Y F, SUN J W, et al. Analysis on the growth and photosynthetic characteristics of 36 euramerican ornamental crabapples[J]. Plant Physiology Journal Plant Physiology Journal , 2013, 49(8):738-742.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[7] 李萍萍,李菡,杨克强,等.观赏海棠抗寒品种 (系) 的选择研究[J].山东农业大学学报(自然科学版),2012,43(2):211-219.
LI P P, LI H, YANG K Q, et al. Selection of cold-resistance cultivars (clones) in crabapple ( Malus spp.)[J]. Journal of Shandong Agricultural University : Natural Science , 2012, 43(2):211-219.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[8] 薜慧勤,孙兰珍,甘信民.花生品种抗旱性综合评价及其抗旱机理的数量分析[J].干旱地区农业研究,1999,17(1):83-87.
XUE H Q, SUN L Z, GAN X M. Study on comprehensive assessment and mechanism of drought resistance in peanut cultivers[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas , 1999, 17(1):83-87.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[9] 李吉跃.植物耐旱性及其机理[J].北京林业大学学报,1991,13(3):92-97.
LI J Y. Mechanisms of drought tolerance in plants[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University , 1991, 13(3):92-97.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[10] 赵世杰,史国安,董新纯.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:中国农业科学技术出版社:2002,84-88.
[11] 熊庆娥.植物生理学实验教程[M].成都:四川科技出版社,2003,55(81):122-126.
[12] XU P L, GUO Y K, BAI J G, et al. Effects of long-term chilling on ultrastructure and antioxidant activity in leaves of two cucumber cultivars under low light[J]. Physiologia Plantarum , 2008, 132(4):467-478.
[13] 王志泰,马瑞,马彦军,等.利用隶属函数法分析胡枝子抗旱性[J].干旱区资源与环境,2013,27(9):119-123.
WANG Z T, MA R, MA Y J, et al. The drought resistance of 5 species of Lespedeza [J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment , 2013, 27(9):119-123.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[14] 王海珍,徐雅丽,张翠丽,等.干旱胁迫对胡杨和灰胡杨幼苗渗透调节物质及抗氧化酶活性的影响[J].干旱区资源与环境,2015,,29(12):125-130.
WANG H Z, XU Y L, ZHNAG C L, et al. Effects of drought stress on osmotic adjustment substances and antioxidant enzymes activity of Populus euphratica and Populus pruinosa seedlings[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment , 2015, 29(12):125-130.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[15] 张美玲,杨永花,廖伟彪,等.四种藤本月季抗旱性综合评价[J].干旱地区农业研究,2008,26(5):173-179.
ZHANG M L, YANG Y H, LIAO W B, et al. Comprehensive evaluation on the drought2resistance of four climbing rose cultivars[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas , 2008, 26(5):173-179.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[16] 史宝胜,刘冬云,张晓磊,等.水分胁迫对金叶榆含水量,细胞质膜相对透性和抗氧化系统的影响[J].西北农业学报,2010,19(9):88-92.
SHI B S, LIU D Y, ZHANG X L, et al. Effects of water stress on water content, relative membrane permeability and activity of antioxidant enzymes of chinese golden leaf elm[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica , 2010, 19(9):88-92.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[17] KUSAKA M, OHTA M, FUJIMURA T. Contribution of inorganic components to osmotic adjustment and leaf folding for drought tolerance in pearl millet[J]. Physiologia Plantarum , 2005, 125(4):474-489.
[18] 贾利强,李吉悦,郎南军,等.水分胁迫对黄连木、清香木幼苗的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,2003,25(3):55-59.
JIA L Q, LI J Y, LANG N J, et al. Effects of water stress on photosynthetic pigment and chlorophyll fluorescence and the survival rate of seedlings of Pistacia chinensis and Pistacia weinmannifolia [J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University , 2003, 25(3):55-59.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[19] FANG Z, BOUWKAMP J C, SOLOMOS T. Chlorophyllase activities and chlorophyll degradation during leaf senescence in non-yellowing mutant and wild type of Phaseolus vulgaris L.[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany , 1998, 49(320):503-510.
[20] 张智猛,宋文武,丁红,等.不同生育期花生渗透调节物质含量和抗氧化酶活性对土壤水分的响应[J].生态学报,2013,33(14):4257-4265.
ZHANG Z M, SONG W W, DING H, et al. The responses of leaf osmoregulation substance and protective enzyme activity of different peanut cultivars to non-sufficient irrigation[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica , 2013, 33(14):4257-4265.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[21] 张文辉,段宝利,周建云,等. 不同种源栓皮栎幼苗叶片水分关系和保护酶活性对干早胁迫的响应[J].植物生态学报,2004,28(4):483-490.
ZHANG W H, DUAN B L, ZHOU J Y, et al. Water relations and activity of cell defense enzymes to water stress in seedling leaves of different provenances of Quercus vairabilis [J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology , 2004, 28(4):483-490.(in Chinese with English abstract)

五个观赏海棠品种抗旱性比较

Comparison on the drought-resistance of five ornamental crabapple cultivars

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	吴燕, 乔晓燕, 葛伟强, 高青海. 高温强光下外源褪黑素对栝楼雌花生理生化特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(3): 421-429.
[2]	郭彦宏, 张晶星, 杨永娟, 陈俊通, 孙明, 廖晶. 六种野生广义菊属植物对干旱胁迫的生理响应[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2018, 30(8): 1349-1354.
[3]	冯芳芳, 魏清江, 苏受婷, 宁少君, 廖小娜, 辜青青. 干旱胁迫对2种柑橘幼苗生长形态、渗透调节物质含量和抗氧化酶活性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2017, 29(9): 1515-1523.
[4]	张玲, 王华, 周静, 徐强. NaCl胁迫对两个辣椒品种幼苗叶绿素荧光参数等生理特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2017, 29(4): 597-604.
[5]	张晓梅, 胡超轶, 刘涛, 周艳虹. 不同光质对黄瓜幼苗抗旱性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2017, 29(1): 58-63.
[6]	柯维忠, 王丽, 杨星鹏, 徐玉琴, 吴丹, 江霞, 夏瑾华, 尹明华, 洪森荣. 广丰千金薯驯化移栽苗对PEG干旱胁迫的光合生理响应[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2016, 28(9): 1462-1475.
[7]	闫道良，郑炳松. 海藻糖浸种对盐胁迫下扬麦19生理特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2016, 28(8): 1271-.
[8]	李慧敏，陆晓民，赵诗浩. 不同LED光质对秋葵幼苗生长、生理特性和气孔特征的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2016, 28(6): 966-.
[9]	原慧芳1，肖荣才1，黄菁1，李月英2，岳海1，田耀华1，*. 东试早柚对不同保水处理的生理响应及综合评价[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2016, 28(4): 586-.
[10]	张家洋. 重金属及盐胁迫对绿金合果芋生理特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2016, 28(4): 601-.
[11]	张冬野, 赵婷婷, 李景富, 姜景彬, 张贺, 陈秀玲, 许向阳. 水杨酸和氯化钙对干旱胁迫下番茄幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2016, 28(10): 1687-1694.
[12]	滕志远1，张会慧2，代欣1，胡举伟1，张秀丽1，*，孙广玉1. 干旱对桑树叶片光系统Ⅱ活性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2016, 28(1): 1-.
[13]	阮志平1， 2. 砂糖椰子对干旱和水分补偿的生理变化[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2016, 28(1): 74-.
[14]	张雪平1，王雪娟2，张金云3，刘爱荣1，*，周玉丽1. 干旱胁迫及复水对银边常春藤生长和生理指标的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2015, 27(2): 194-.
[15]	苏文锋1，苏振声1，林玲玲1，濮阳雪华2，*. 干旱胁迫下抗蒸腾剂对叶子花生理特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2015, 27(12): 2122-.