万寿菊属植物耐热性与抗旱性的评价及生长生理特性的研究
|
摘要
万寿菊属（Tagetes）植物为菊科(Compositae)一年生草本，具有重要的观赏和经济以及生态价值。目前在我国广泛种植并在城市园林绿化中普遍应用。但在生产培育和园林应用中，高温和干旱胁迫会导致植株叶片萎蔫、叶色枯黄和花期缩短等，影响其观赏效果和植株的正常生长。
本文以万寿菊属常见的9个观赏品种为试验材料，采用室内模拟高温胁迫（昼夜温度38/21℃）和自然持续干旱胁迫的方法，分别研究了9个品种耐热性和抗旱性的差异，采用数学多元统计分析方法结合形态指标进行了品种的抗性综合评价。并从中选择了抗性差异较大的2个品种即：抗性强的‘金门’（Tagetes patula L. cv. Gate Gold）和抗性差的‘迪阿哥’（Tagetes patula L. cv. Durango）为试材，进行其抗性生长和生理特性的研究。系统研究了两个品种在不同生长阶段（苗期和初花期）分别对高温和干旱胁迫的生长（叶面积、叶厚、根冠比和生物量等）和叶片形态显微结构以及生理响应（渗透调节系统、水分状况、抗氧化系统、光合系统、花粉活力和柱头活性等）；并通过相关性分析筛选出与高温和干旱关系密切的主要生理指标对‘金门’和‘迪阿哥’进行了苗期高温干旱交互胁迫下的生理研究。通过以上试验内容揭示万寿菊对逆境胁迫的形态和生理适应机制，为今后万寿菊抗逆育种与生产应用提供理论依据和参考。
获得的主要研究结果如下：
1.9个品种在38/21℃高温胁迫下生长和生理表现不同。通过数学多元统计分析方法结合高温半致死温度和热害指数对9个品种耐热性进行综合评价结果为：‘巨人’、‘金门’和‘拳王’耐热性强；‘发现’和‘珍妮’次之；‘鸿运’、‘小英雄’、‘大英雄’和‘迪阿哥’4个品种耐热性差。
2.自然持续干旱胁迫下，供试品种生长和生理均受到不同程度的影响。通过数学多元统计分析方法结合旱害指数综合评定9个品种抗旱性强弱为：‘珍妮’、‘金门’、‘鸿运’和‘拳王’抗旱性强；‘巨人’抗旱性次之；‘大英雄’、‘发现’、‘小英雄’和‘迪阿哥’抗旱性差。
3.抗性强的‘金门’与抗性差的‘迪阿哥’叶片形态和解剖结构相比，具有叶面积小；气孔小；下表皮气孔密度高；上表皮、下表皮和角质层厚；栅栏组织排列紧密的叶片抗性结构。38/21℃高温胁迫下，‘金门’和‘迪阿哥’苗期和初花期生长均受到不同程度的影响和抑制。耐热性强的‘金门’变化较小；而耐热差的‘迪阿哥’相对增长量、叶色和生物量等均受到高温的明显影响，尤其苗期生长受到显著抑制。另外，高温胁迫4d对‘迪阿哥’叶片组织结构影响显著，主要表现为叶片紧密度、栅栏组织和角质层均显著降低；而‘金门’变化差异不显著。
4.38/21℃高温条件下，两个抗性不同的品种苗期和初花期生理发生不同变化。高温胁迫4d明显提高了两个品种渗透调节物质含量。其中，Pro在抗性差的‘迪阿哥’中积累较多，Pro在万寿菊中的累积是一种伤害性反应；而SPC和SSC在‘金门’叶片和花中增加幅度均高于‘迪阿哥’。同时，高温胁迫对‘迪阿哥’叶片RWC的抑制显著高于‘金门’。苗期叶片与初花期叶片和花中的H_2O_2、O_2.-、MDA和RC均明显提高，尤其‘迪阿哥’增加更显著。保护酶（SOD、POD、CAT、APX）活性和抗氧化物质（ASA、GSH）含量在高温影响下均被激活，整体表现为先增加后降低的变化趋势，个别指标在‘迪阿哥’中表现为持续性连续下降的变化。高温胁迫明显提高了‘金门’酶的活性和抗氧化物质含量，但胁迫4d后‘迪阿哥’部分酶活性明显低于处理前水平。另外，高温胁迫下‘迪阿哥’光合色素、净光合速率、气孔导度和水分利用效率均显著下降；而‘金门’光合色素、净光合速率和气孔导度变化较小，水分利用效率明显提高，蒸腾速率较对照显著降低。而且38/21℃高温处理下，‘迪阿哥’花粉活力和柱头活性明显降低，影响高于‘金门’。
5.干旱胁迫6d后，抗旱性差的‘迪阿哥’苗期和初花期地上和地下生物量均显著下降；而‘金门’变化不显著。干旱胁迫提高了2个品种的气孔密度，其中‘迪阿哥’上表皮气孔密度增加幅度明显高于‘金门’。另外，干旱胁迫导致万寿菊叶片上表皮、下表皮和栅栏组织厚度降低，叶片紧密度下降，抗性差的‘迪阿哥’品种下降幅度较大，而‘金门’变化差异不显著。
6.干旱胁迫下，两个抗性不同品种苗期和初花期生理变化不同。干旱胁迫下生理指标整体变化趋势与高温胁迫表现相似。‘金门’苗期和初花期不同生长阶段，叶片和花的保护酶活性在干旱胁迫下持续的时间和增加的幅度均显著高于抗旱性差的品种。同时‘金门’保持了较高的RWC、SPC、SSC和抗氧化物质（ASA、GSH、Car）含量以及较低水平的H_2O_2、O_2.-、MDA和RC。另外，干旱胁迫前期（2d）两个品种净光合速率、气孔导度、胞间CO_2浓度均降低；而后期净光合速率、气孔导度持续下降，而胞间CO_2浓度表现为增加。试验证明万寿菊干旱胁迫前期光合作用降低由气孔因素引起的，后期光合下降由非气孔因素引起的。
7.万寿菊叶片和花应对高温和干旱胁迫的响应机理不同。4种保护酶活性在两个抗性不同品种叶中均明显高于同期花；而抗氧化物质含量（ASA、GSH）在花中显著高于叶片。高温胁迫和干旱胁迫下，花中积累的H_2O_2含量、O_2.-、MDA含量和RC均高于叶片。
8.相关分析表明，万寿菊苗期和初花期的RWC、SOD、POD、CAT、APX和Car与热害指数和旱害指数均呈显著或极显著负相关，且相关系数较高；Pro、H_2O_2、O_2.-、MDA和RC与热害指数和旱害指数呈显著或极显著正相关。另外，万寿菊初花期的光合参数与胁迫后植株的形态表现关系也较为密切。相关系数较高的指标可以作为今后鉴定万寿菊属其他品种耐热性和抗旱性的重要生理指标。
9.高温干旱交互胁迫下，‘迪阿哥’的H_2O_2、O_2.-、MDA和RC均持续性显著增加，而保护酶活性明显降低，胁迫4d后4种酶活性均显著低于对照，其表现与高温或干旱单一胁迫表现不同；而‘金门’胁迫4d后4种酶活性均显著高于0d。可见，‘金门’在短期（4d）的高温干旱交互胁迫下仍然具有较强的活性氧清除能力，抗高温干旱能力较好,综合抗性较好。
10.综合分析认为：‘拳王’和‘金门’耐热性和抗旱性均较强；而‘大英雄’、‘小英雄’和‘迪阿哥’耐热性和抗旱性均较差。‘金门’和‘拳王’可作为今后万寿菊生产和育种尤其是园林应用的首选。
Marigold (Tagetes) which belongs to the Compositae family is usually used as a beddingplant and cut flower. It has important ornamental, economic and ecological value. Thoughmarigold plants have good adaptability, their planting regions have along dry and heat periodwhich certainly depress plant growth and cause a limitation to the production of the plants.
The effects of heat stress (day/night38/21℃)or continuous soil drought stress on thedifference of tolerance were studied in9marigold cultivars. The tolerances of the9cultivarswere evaluated through multiple statistics analysis. On the basis of the results, Tagetes patulaL. cv. Gate Gold (strong resistance) and Tagetes patula L. cv. Durango (weak resistance)were selected as experimental materials to study their mechanism of growth and physiologicalresponse differences under heat and drought stress at different growth stage (seeding and earlyflowering stage). We try to explore the changes of growth and the mechanism ofphysiological characters (osmotic adjustment, water status, defensive enzymes andphotosynthesis) as well as anatomical structures in different tolerance of two marigoldcultivars after they suffered stress. In addition, the main indexes were selected by correlativeanalysis to evaluate the differcence of the two cultivars under heat and drought stress. It willprovide value reference to instruct marigold breeding of marigold tolerance in regions aridand semi-arid areas.The main results were as follows:
1. The growth and physiological responses of9cultivars were differently responded toheat stress (38/21℃). Heat tolerance of9cultivars was comprehensively evaluated with themethod of multiple statistics analysis, LT50and heat index. According to the results,‘Giant’,‘Gate Gold’ and ‘Chokdee’ were higher tolerance to38/21℃heat stress,‘Discovery’ and‘Janie’ were moderate resistant intensity to heat stress, while ‘Bonanza’,‘Little Hero’,‘GreatHero’ and ‘Durango’were sensitive to heat stress.
2. Water stress has different influence on the growth and physiological indexes in9marigold cultivars. The drought resistance of9cultivars was evaluated by multiple statisticsanalysis and drought index. The results of the resistance to drought stress as follow:‘Janie’, ‘Gate Gold’,‘Bonanza’ and ‘Chokdee’ were high-tolerant cultivars,‘Giant’ was next,‘GreatHero’,‘Discovery’,‘Little Hero’ and ‘Durango’ were weaker in drought tolerance.
3. From the leaf anatomic stucture, the ability of tolerance in ‘Gate Gold’ with smallleaves and stomata, stomatal density of lower epidermis, leaf thickness and cutin layerthickness, as well as stockade tissue thickness were stronger than in ‘Durango’. After4days38/21℃heat treatment, growth of two cultivars were inhibited to various degrees at seedingand early flowering stage, especially the relative growth rate and plant biomass of ‘Durango’at seeding stage was obviously declined comparing with control, while the changes weremuch slighter in ‘Gate Gold’. In addition, the tightness of leaf tissue structure, cutin layerthickness and stockade tissue thickness were decreased highly in ‘Durango’ after4days heatstress, but were not influenced significantly in ‘Gate Gold’.
4. There were differences in physiological responses of two cultivars under38/21℃stress. The contentes of osmotic adjustment in marigold were stimulated. Pro contentaccumulation was higher in‘Durango’ than in ‘Gate Gold’. However, SPC and SSC contentesin leaves and petals increased more rapidly in ‘Gate Gold’ than that in ‘Durango’. Meanwhile,leaves of ‘Gate Gold’ maintained more relative water content than ‘Durango’ during heattreatment. Additionally, heat stress caused MDA, RC, O_2.-and H_2O_2increased in the twocultivars, especially in heat-sensitive cultivar ‘Durango’. SOD, POD, CAT, APX, ASA andGSH were increased initially, and then decreased. However, some of index of ‘Durango’were reduced during the heat treatment. On day4, the protective enzymes and non-enzymaticantioxidants (GSH and ASA) of the leaves and petals in ‘Gate Gold’ were higher than in‘Durango’. In addition to that, photosynihetic pigment, net photosynthesis rate, stomatalconductance and water use efficiency declined in ‘Durango’ with heat stress, while therewere little changes in photosynihetic pigment, net photosynthesis rate and stomatalconductance, water use efficiency increased as well as transpiration rate decreasedsignificantly in ‘Gate Gold’.
5. The results showed that plant biomass of ‘Durango’ were lesser than control after6days water stress. Furthermore, stomatal density of two cultivars increased under droughtstress, especially in upper epidermis of ‘Durango’. Additionally, the tightness of leaf tissue,the upper epidermis and lower epidermis thickness and stockade tissue thickness weredecreased highly in ‘Durango’ after4days water stress, but not significantly in ‘Gate Gold’.
6. Under drought stress, the change tendencies of physiological index were similar toheat stress. There were also striking differences in two cultivars. The raise rate, prolongedtime and activity peaks of SOD, POD, CAT and APX as well as ASA and GSH contents inleaves and petals of ‘Gate Gold’ were higher than those of ‘Durango’, while MDA, RC, O_2.- and H_2O_2of ‘Gate Gold’ were lower than those of ‘Durango’. Additionally, netphotosynthesis rate, stomatal conductance and intercellular CO_2concentration decreased from0d to2d stress. However, net photosynthesis rate, stomatal conductance continoued to declinewith stress time, while intercellular CO_2concentration showed increase at later stages of waterstress (4-6d). Therefore, the decrease of photosynthesis in marigold may be linked to stomatallimitation under light water stress, while that may be attributed to nonstomatal limitationunder heavy stress.
7. The leaves and petals of marigold responded differently when suffering stress. Theantioxidant enzymes in leaves were higher than in petals, but conversely, the AsA and GSHwere lower in leaves than in petals. Further, MDA, RC, O_2.-and H_2O_2in petals were muchhigher than those of leaves.
8. The path coefficient analysis showed a significant negatively correlation betweenRWC, SOD, POD, CAT, APX, Car and heat index. However, there was significant positivecorrelation between Pro, H_2O_2, O_2.-, MDA, RC and heat index of the two cultivars understress. These indexes which higher coefficient may be applied as identification of toleranceindexes in Tagetes other cultivars.
9. The contents of H_2O_2, O_2.-, MDA and RC showed increased remarkably in ‘Durango’in all process of high temperature and drought stress, while the enzyme activities in ‘Durango’decreased notably on day4and were lower than that of control. It was different in single heatstress or drought stress. On the contrary, antioxidant enzyme activities in ‘Gate Gold’ wereraised at first and then reduced but still higher than those of control.‘Gate Gold’ maydecompose the active oxygen effectively under heat and drought stress, and perform strongerstress resistant adaptability.
10. The high-tolerant marigold cultivars included ‘Chokdee’ and ‘Gate Gold’, while‘Great Hero’,‘Little Hero’ and ‘Durango’ were weaker in tolerance.‘Chokdee’ and ‘GateGold’ are recommended for ornamental landscapes that receive high temperature in growthseason.
本文以万寿菊属常见的9个观赏品种为试验材料，采用室内模拟高温胁迫（昼夜温度38/21℃）和自然持续干旱胁迫的方法，分别研究了9个品种耐热性和抗旱性的差异，采用数学多元统计分析方法结合形态指标进行了品种的抗性综合评价。并从中选择了抗性差异较大的2个品种即：抗性强的‘金门’（Tagetes patula L. cv. Gate Gold）和抗性差的‘迪阿哥’（Tagetes patula L. cv. Durango）为试材，进行其抗性生长和生理特性的研究。系统研究了两个品种在不同生长阶段（苗期和初花期）分别对高温和干旱胁迫的生长（叶面积、叶厚、根冠比和生物量等）和叶片形态显微结构以及生理响应（渗透调节系统、水分状况、抗氧化系统、光合系统、花粉活力和柱头活性等）；并通过相关性分析筛选出与高温和干旱关系密切的主要生理指标对‘金门’和‘迪阿哥’进行了苗期高温干旱交互胁迫下的生理研究。通过以上试验内容揭示万寿菊对逆境胁迫的形态和生理适应机制，为今后万寿菊抗逆育种与生产应用提供理论依据和参考。
获得的主要研究结果如下：
1.9个品种在38/21℃高温胁迫下生长和生理表现不同。通过数学多元统计分析方法结合高温半致死温度和热害指数对9个品种耐热性进行综合评价结果为：‘巨人’、‘金门’和‘拳王’耐热性强；‘发现’和‘珍妮’次之；‘鸿运’、‘小英雄’、‘大英雄’和‘迪阿哥’4个品种耐热性差。
2.自然持续干旱胁迫下，供试品种生长和生理均受到不同程度的影响。通过数学多元统计分析方法结合旱害指数综合评定9个品种抗旱性强弱为：‘珍妮’、‘金门’、‘鸿运’和‘拳王’抗旱性强；‘巨人’抗旱性次之；‘大英雄’、‘发现’、‘小英雄’和‘迪阿哥’抗旱性差。
3.抗性强的‘金门’与抗性差的‘迪阿哥’叶片形态和解剖结构相比，具有叶面积小；气孔小；下表皮气孔密度高；上表皮、下表皮和角质层厚；栅栏组织排列紧密的叶片抗性结构。38/21℃高温胁迫下，‘金门’和‘迪阿哥’苗期和初花期生长均受到不同程度的影响和抑制。耐热性强的‘金门’变化较小；而耐热差的‘迪阿哥’相对增长量、叶色和生物量等均受到高温的明显影响，尤其苗期生长受到显著抑制。另外，高温胁迫4d对‘迪阿哥’叶片组织结构影响显著，主要表现为叶片紧密度、栅栏组织和角质层均显著降低；而‘金门’变化差异不显著。
4.38/21℃高温条件下，两个抗性不同的品种苗期和初花期生理发生不同变化。高温胁迫4d明显提高了两个品种渗透调节物质含量。其中，Pro在抗性差的‘迪阿哥’中积累较多，Pro在万寿菊中的累积是一种伤害性反应；而SPC和SSC在‘金门’叶片和花中增加幅度均高于‘迪阿哥’。同时，高温胁迫对‘迪阿哥’叶片RWC的抑制显著高于‘金门’。苗期叶片与初花期叶片和花中的H_2O_2、O_2.-、MDA和RC均明显提高，尤其‘迪阿哥’增加更显著。保护酶（SOD、POD、CAT、APX）活性和抗氧化物质（ASA、GSH）含量在高温影响下均被激活，整体表现为先增加后降低的变化趋势，个别指标在‘迪阿哥’中表现为持续性连续下降的变化。高温胁迫明显提高了‘金门’酶的活性和抗氧化物质含量，但胁迫4d后‘迪阿哥’部分酶活性明显低于处理前水平。另外，高温胁迫下‘迪阿哥’光合色素、净光合速率、气孔导度和水分利用效率均显著下降；而‘金门’光合色素、净光合速率和气孔导度变化较小，水分利用效率明显提高，蒸腾速率较对照显著降低。而且38/21℃高温处理下，‘迪阿哥’花粉活力和柱头活性明显降低，影响高于‘金门’。
5.干旱胁迫6d后，抗旱性差的‘迪阿哥’苗期和初花期地上和地下生物量均显著下降；而‘金门’变化不显著。干旱胁迫提高了2个品种的气孔密度，其中‘迪阿哥’上表皮气孔密度增加幅度明显高于‘金门’。另外，干旱胁迫导致万寿菊叶片上表皮、下表皮和栅栏组织厚度降低，叶片紧密度下降，抗性差的‘迪阿哥’品种下降幅度较大，而‘金门’变化差异不显著。
6.干旱胁迫下，两个抗性不同品种苗期和初花期生理变化不同。干旱胁迫下生理指标整体变化趋势与高温胁迫表现相似。‘金门’苗期和初花期不同生长阶段，叶片和花的保护酶活性在干旱胁迫下持续的时间和增加的幅度均显著高于抗旱性差的品种。同时‘金门’保持了较高的RWC、SPC、SSC和抗氧化物质（ASA、GSH、Car）含量以及较低水平的H_2O_2、O_2.-、MDA和RC。另外，干旱胁迫前期（2d）两个品种净光合速率、气孔导度、胞间CO_2浓度均降低；而后期净光合速率、气孔导度持续下降，而胞间CO_2浓度表现为增加。试验证明万寿菊干旱胁迫前期光合作用降低由气孔因素引起的，后期光合下降由非气孔因素引起的。
7.万寿菊叶片和花应对高温和干旱胁迫的响应机理不同。4种保护酶活性在两个抗性不同品种叶中均明显高于同期花；而抗氧化物质含量（ASA、GSH）在花中显著高于叶片。高温胁迫和干旱胁迫下，花中积累的H_2O_2含量、O_2.-、MDA含量和RC均高于叶片。
8.相关分析表明，万寿菊苗期和初花期的RWC、SOD、POD、CAT、APX和Car与热害指数和旱害指数均呈显著或极显著负相关，且相关系数较高；Pro、H_2O_2、O_2.-、MDA和RC与热害指数和旱害指数呈显著或极显著正相关。另外，万寿菊初花期的光合参数与胁迫后植株的形态表现关系也较为密切。相关系数较高的指标可以作为今后鉴定万寿菊属其他品种耐热性和抗旱性的重要生理指标。
9.高温干旱交互胁迫下，‘迪阿哥’的H_2O_2、O_2.-、MDA和RC均持续性显著增加，而保护酶活性明显降低，胁迫4d后4种酶活性均显著低于对照，其表现与高温或干旱单一胁迫表现不同；而‘金门’胁迫4d后4种酶活性均显著高于0d。可见，‘金门’在短期（4d）的高温干旱交互胁迫下仍然具有较强的活性氧清除能力，抗高温干旱能力较好,综合抗性较好。
10.综合分析认为：‘拳王’和‘金门’耐热性和抗旱性均较强；而‘大英雄’、‘小英雄’和‘迪阿哥’耐热性和抗旱性均较差。‘金门’和‘拳王’可作为今后万寿菊生产和育种尤其是园林应用的首选。
Marigold (Tagetes) which belongs to the Compositae family is usually used as a beddingplant and cut flower. It has important ornamental, economic and ecological value. Thoughmarigold plants have good adaptability, their planting regions have along dry and heat periodwhich certainly depress plant growth and cause a limitation to the production of the plants.
The effects of heat stress (day/night38/21℃)or continuous soil drought stress on thedifference of tolerance were studied in9marigold cultivars. The tolerances of the9cultivarswere evaluated through multiple statistics analysis. On the basis of the results, Tagetes patulaL. cv. Gate Gold (strong resistance) and Tagetes patula L. cv. Durango (weak resistance)were selected as experimental materials to study their mechanism of growth and physiologicalresponse differences under heat and drought stress at different growth stage (seeding and earlyflowering stage). We try to explore the changes of growth and the mechanism ofphysiological characters (osmotic adjustment, water status, defensive enzymes andphotosynthesis) as well as anatomical structures in different tolerance of two marigoldcultivars after they suffered stress. In addition, the main indexes were selected by correlativeanalysis to evaluate the differcence of the two cultivars under heat and drought stress. It willprovide value reference to instruct marigold breeding of marigold tolerance in regions aridand semi-arid areas.The main results were as follows:
1. The growth and physiological responses of9cultivars were differently responded toheat stress (38/21℃). Heat tolerance of9cultivars was comprehensively evaluated with themethod of multiple statistics analysis, LT50and heat index. According to the results,‘Giant’,‘Gate Gold’ and ‘Chokdee’ were higher tolerance to38/21℃heat stress,‘Discovery’ and‘Janie’ were moderate resistant intensity to heat stress, while ‘Bonanza’,‘Little Hero’,‘GreatHero’ and ‘Durango’were sensitive to heat stress.
2. Water stress has different influence on the growth and physiological indexes in9marigold cultivars. The drought resistance of9cultivars was evaluated by multiple statisticsanalysis and drought index. The results of the resistance to drought stress as follow:‘Janie’, ‘Gate Gold’,‘Bonanza’ and ‘Chokdee’ were high-tolerant cultivars,‘Giant’ was next,‘GreatHero’,‘Discovery’,‘Little Hero’ and ‘Durango’ were weaker in drought tolerance.
3. From the leaf anatomic stucture, the ability of tolerance in ‘Gate Gold’ with smallleaves and stomata, stomatal density of lower epidermis, leaf thickness and cutin layerthickness, as well as stockade tissue thickness were stronger than in ‘Durango’. After4days38/21℃heat treatment, growth of two cultivars were inhibited to various degrees at seedingand early flowering stage, especially the relative growth rate and plant biomass of ‘Durango’at seeding stage was obviously declined comparing with control, while the changes weremuch slighter in ‘Gate Gold’. In addition, the tightness of leaf tissue structure, cutin layerthickness and stockade tissue thickness were decreased highly in ‘Durango’ after4days heatstress, but were not influenced significantly in ‘Gate Gold’.
4. There were differences in physiological responses of two cultivars under38/21℃stress. The contentes of osmotic adjustment in marigold were stimulated. Pro contentaccumulation was higher in‘Durango’ than in ‘Gate Gold’. However, SPC and SSC contentesin leaves and petals increased more rapidly in ‘Gate Gold’ than that in ‘Durango’. Meanwhile,leaves of ‘Gate Gold’ maintained more relative water content than ‘Durango’ during heattreatment. Additionally, heat stress caused MDA, RC, O_2.-and H_2O_2increased in the twocultivars, especially in heat-sensitive cultivar ‘Durango’. SOD, POD, CAT, APX, ASA andGSH were increased initially, and then decreased. However, some of index of ‘Durango’were reduced during the heat treatment. On day4, the protective enzymes and non-enzymaticantioxidants (GSH and ASA) of the leaves and petals in ‘Gate Gold’ were higher than in‘Durango’. In addition to that, photosynihetic pigment, net photosynthesis rate, stomatalconductance and water use efficiency declined in ‘Durango’ with heat stress, while therewere little changes in photosynihetic pigment, net photosynthesis rate and stomatalconductance, water use efficiency increased as well as transpiration rate decreasedsignificantly in ‘Gate Gold’.
5. The results showed that plant biomass of ‘Durango’ were lesser than control after6days water stress. Furthermore, stomatal density of two cultivars increased under droughtstress, especially in upper epidermis of ‘Durango’. Additionally, the tightness of leaf tissue,the upper epidermis and lower epidermis thickness and stockade tissue thickness weredecreased highly in ‘Durango’ after4days water stress, but not significantly in ‘Gate Gold’.
6. Under drought stress, the change tendencies of physiological index were similar toheat stress. There were also striking differences in two cultivars. The raise rate, prolongedtime and activity peaks of SOD, POD, CAT and APX as well as ASA and GSH contents inleaves and petals of ‘Gate Gold’ were higher than those of ‘Durango’, while MDA, RC, O_2.- and H_2O_2of ‘Gate Gold’ were lower than those of ‘Durango’. Additionally, netphotosynthesis rate, stomatal conductance and intercellular CO_2concentration decreased from0d to2d stress. However, net photosynthesis rate, stomatal conductance continoued to declinewith stress time, while intercellular CO_2concentration showed increase at later stages of waterstress (4-6d). Therefore, the decrease of photosynthesis in marigold may be linked to stomatallimitation under light water stress, while that may be attributed to nonstomatal limitationunder heavy stress.
7. The leaves and petals of marigold responded differently when suffering stress. Theantioxidant enzymes in leaves were higher than in petals, but conversely, the AsA and GSHwere lower in leaves than in petals. Further, MDA, RC, O_2.-and H_2O_2in petals were muchhigher than those of leaves.
8. The path coefficient analysis showed a significant negatively correlation betweenRWC, SOD, POD, CAT, APX, Car and heat index. However, there was significant positivecorrelation between Pro, H_2O_2, O_2.-, MDA, RC and heat index of the two cultivars understress. These indexes which higher coefficient may be applied as identification of toleranceindexes in Tagetes other cultivars.
9. The contents of H_2O_2, O_2.-, MDA and RC showed increased remarkably in ‘Durango’in all process of high temperature and drought stress, while the enzyme activities in ‘Durango’decreased notably on day4and were lower than that of control. It was different in single heatstress or drought stress. On the contrary, antioxidant enzyme activities in ‘Gate Gold’ wereraised at first and then reduced but still higher than those of control.‘Gate Gold’ maydecompose the active oxygen effectively under heat and drought stress, and perform strongerstress resistant adaptability.
10. The high-tolerant marigold cultivars included ‘Chokdee’ and ‘Gate Gold’, while‘Great Hero’,‘Little Hero’ and ‘Durango’ were weaker in tolerance.‘Chokdee’ and ‘GateGold’ are recommended for ornamental landscapes that receive high temperature in growthseason.
引文
蔡永立，宋永昌.2001.浙江天童常绿阔叶林藤本植物的适应生态学.植物生态学报，25(1):90~98
曹福亮，郑军，汪贵斌，戴文圣.2008.高温胁迫下14个银杏品种的耐热性.林业科学，44(12):35~38
陈莉，周连霞，马锋旺，梁东，华智锐.2008.转MnSOD基因仙客来植株的获得及其对高温胁迫的抗性.西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版)，6(3):155~160
杜磊，赵尊练，巩振辉，郭建伟.2010.水分胁迫对线辣椒叶片渗透调节作用的影响.干旱地区农业研究，28(3):188~190
范苏鲁，苑兆和，冯立娟，王晓慧，丁雪梅，甄红丽.2011.干旱胁迫对大丽花生理生化指标的影响.应用生态学报，22(3):651~657
范志宏，郭春绒，王金胜.2010.万寿菊根提取物对西瓜枯萎病菌的抑菌活性成分及作用机理研究.植物病理学报，40(2):195~201
高焕章，吴楚，李申如，周瑞锋.2002.综合指数法在核桃选种中应用研究.林业科学，38(3):171~176
高松，苏培玺，严巧娣，丁松爽，张岭梅.2009. C4荒漠植物猪毛菜与木本猪毛菜的叶片解剖结构及光合生理特征.植物生态学报，33(2):347~354
高天,马锋旺,梁东.2006.高温胁迫对两个仙客来品种抗氧化系统的影响.西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版)，34(6):82~85
高彦萍，冯莹，马志军，李强，张秀娟.2007.水分胁迫下不同抗旱类型大豆叶片气孔特性变化研究.干旱地区农业研究，25(2):77~79
葛体达，隋方功，张金政，吕银燕，周广胜.2005.玉米根、叶质膜透性和叶片水分对土壤干旱胁迫的反应.西北植物学报，25(3):507~512
韩建秋,王秀峰,张志国.2008.土壤水分梯度对白三叶光合作用和根系分布的影响.生态学报，28(2):494~499
何淼，李文鹤，卓丽环.2011.野菊幼苗对自然干旱胁迫的生理响应.草业科学，28(8):1456~1460
胡伟娟，张启翔，潘会堂，董玲玲.2010.报春叶片解剖结构与耐热性的关系.华中农业大学学报，29(3):363~368
回瑞华，侯冬岩，李铁纯，刘晓媛，刁全平.2009.万寿菊不同部位挥发性化学成分比较研究.分析试验室，28(7):54~57
黄锦文，陈冬梅，郑红艳，骆娟，林争春，林文雄.2009.暖季型草坪草对高温胁迫的生理响应.中国生态农业学报，17(5):964~967
黄珊珊，廖景平.2010.热胁迫下羽叶薰衣草植物腺毛发育的超微结构.基因组学与应用生物学，29(1):97~102
姜义宝，崔国文，李红.2005.干旱胁迫下外源钙对苜蓿抗旱相关生理指标的影响.草业学报，14(2):32~36
巨云为，樊培峰，奚月明，薛中官.2010.万寿菊提取物对松材线虫的毒杀作用.浙江林学院学报，27(2):316~319
孔兰静，张志国.2009.三种观赏草对土壤干旱胁迫的生理响应[博士学位论文].青岛：山东农业大学
寇建村，杨文权，贾志宽，狄升蒙，韩清芳.2008.不同紫花苜蓿品种叶片旱生结构的比较.西北农林科技大学学报（自然科学版），36(8):67~72
李大婧，刘春泉.2005.万寿菊叶黄素的提取及分析方法研究进展.食品科学，26(9):582~585
李大婧，刘春泉，方桂珍.2007.不同品系万寿菊花中叶黄素和叶黄素酯含量的测定.林产化学与工业，27(2):105~108
李贵全，张海燕，季兰，赵二开，刘建兵，李玲，张家蓉.2006.不同大豆品种抗旱性综合评价，应用生态学报，17(12):2408~2412
李敏，王维华，王然，刘润进.2004.高温胁迫对菠菜叶片保护酶活性和膜透性的影响.园艺学报，31(1):99~100
李娜，房伟民，陈发棣，陈素梅，陈煜.2010.切花寒菊小花对低温胁迫的生理响应及其抗寒性分析，西北植物学报，30(4):0645~0651
李福荣.2005.万寿菊雄性不育的遗传与应用研究.[博士学位论文].北京：北京林业大学
李宁毅，孙莉娟，刘冰.2010. S3307及其与SA复配对万寿菊穴盘苗生长和抗性生理的影响.种子，29(8):38~41
李为观，杨寅桂，魏跃，孟佳丽.2010.热胁迫下黄瓜幼苗生理生化指标变化CSHSP70基因表达.南京农业大学学报，33(3):47~50
李晓锋，侯瑞贤，朱玉英，侯喜林，朱红芳.2009.高温胁迫对大白菜叶绿素荧光特性的影响.农业工程学报，25（增刊1）:49~54
李晓芬，尚庆茂，张志刚，王立浩，张宝玺.2008.多元统计分析方法在辣椒品种耐盐性评价中的应用.园艺学报，35(3):351~356
李永红，魏玉香，谷茂.2008.水杨酸预处理对鸡冠花幼苗热胁迫的生理效应.西北植物学报，28(11):2257~2262
李振军，李景富.2010.耐热番茄Hsf24基因克隆与分析.东北农业大学学报，41(3):29~32.
梁雪.2009.高温胁迫对夏大葱PSⅡ光化学活性的影响.[硕士学位论文].青岛：山东农业大学
吕金印，郭涛.2010.水分胁迫对不同品种甜高粱幼苗保护酶活性等生理特性的影响.干旱地区农业研究，28(4):89~93
柳新红，何小勇，苏冬梅，魏来，袁德义，王军峰.2007.翅荚木种源抗寒性综合评价体系的构建与应用.林业科学，43(10):45~50
刘景辉，赵海超，任永峰，张向前.2009.土壤水分胁迫对燕麦叶片渗透调节物质含量的影响.西北植物学报，29(7):1432~1436
刘强，陈玲，邱家洲，赵建夫.2010.污泥堆肥对园林植物生长及重金属积累的影响.同济大学学报(自然科学版)，38(6):870~876
刘祖棋，张石城.1993.植物抗性生理学.北京：中国农业出版社，198~219
马莉，殷秀琴.2010.污泥蚯蚓粪对万寿菊生长发育的影响.应用生态学报，21(5):1346~1350
毛胜利，杜永臣，王孝宣，朱德蔚.2005.高温胁迫下番茄体内ABA水平的变化及其对花粉萌发的影响.园艺学报，32(2):234~238
孟林，尚春艳，毛培春，张国芳，安沙舟.2009.偃麦草属植物种质材料苗期耐盐性综合评价，草业学报，18(4):67~74
孟庆立，关周博，冯佰利，柴岩，胡银岗.2009.谷子抗旱相关性状的主成分与模糊聚类分析.中国农业科学，42(8):2667~2675
孟庆杰，王光全，董绍锋.2004.桃叶片组织解剖结构特征与其抗旱性关系的研究.干旱地区农业研究，22(3):123~126
莫健彬，陈必胜，黄梅，胡永红.2007.高温对玉簪品种部分生理指标的影响研究.种子，26(5):48~51
彭伟秀，王文全，梁海永.2003.水分胁迫对甘草营养器官解剖构造的影响.河北农业大学学报，26(3):46~48
齐迎春，宁国贵，包满珠.2007.应用ISSR分子标记和表型性状评价孔雀草自交系的遗传关系.中国农业科学，40(6):1236~1241
钱永强，孙振元，韩蕾，巨关升.2010.野牛草叶片活性氧及其清除系统对水分胁迫的响应.生态学报，30(7):1920~1926
秦爱国，高俊杰，于贤昌.2009.温度胁迫对马铃薯叶片抗坏血酸代谢系统的影响.应用生态学报，20(12):2964~2970
单长卷，韩蕊莲，梁宗锁.2012.干旱胁迫下黄土高原4种乡土禾草抗氧化特性.生态学报，32(4):174~1184
师光禄，王有年，王鸿雷，赵莉蔺，刘素琪.2007.万寿菊根提取物对山楂叶螨谷胱甘肽S2转移酶和蛋白酶及蛋白质含量的影响.应用生态学报，18(2):400~404
史刚荣，程雪莲，刘蕾.2006.扁担木叶片和次生木质部解剖和水分生理特征的可塑性.应用生态学报，17(10):1801~1806
史燕山，骆建霞，王煦，赵坤平，刘玉冬，黄俊轩.2005.5种草本地被植物抗旱性研究.西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版)，33(5):130~134
石永红，万里强，刘建宁，王运琦，郭锐，吴欣明，李向林.2010.多年生黑麦草抗旱性主成分及隶属函数分析.草地学报，18(5):69~672
孙铁军，苏日古嘎，马万里，武菊英.2008.10种禾草苗期抗旱性的比较研究.草业学报，17(4):42~49
唐道城，唐楠，唐新桥.2008.万寿菊资源观赏性状的遗传聚类分析.青海大学学报(自然科学版)，26(5):45~47
汪炳良，徐敏，史庆华，曹家树.2004.高温胁迫对早熟花椰菜叶片抗氧化系统和叶绿素及其荧光参数的影响.中国农业科学，37(8):1245~1250
王冬梅，许向阳，李景富，崔琳.2004.热胁迫对番茄叶肉细胞叶绿体超微结构的影响.园艺学报,31(6):820~821
王利军，黄卫东，战吉成.2003.水杨酸和高温锻炼与葡萄抗热性及抗氧化的关系.园艺学报，30(4):452~454
王志和，于丽艳，曹德航.2005.短期高温处理对大白菜几个生理指标的影响.西北农业学报，14(3):82~85
王军，周美学，许如根，吕超，黄祖六.2007.大麦耐湿性鉴定指标和评价方法研究.中国农业科学,40(10):2145~2152
王勇.2010.黄土高原四个菊科蒿属种耗水规律及抗旱特性的研究.[硕士学位论文].杨凌：西北农林科技大学
王玉刚，阿不来提齐曼.2006.两狗牙根品种对干旱胁迫反应的差异.草业学报，15(4):58~64
王泽立，张恒悦，阎先喜.1998.玉米抗旱品种的形态解剖学研究.西北植物学报，18(4):581~583
魏玉香，李永红，谷茂，刘晓辉.2008.鸡冠花幼苗热胁迫耐性与其SOD之间的关联.西北植物学报，28(10):2055~2061
魏巍，孔云，张玉萍，王美超，李振茹，姚允聪.2010.梨园芳香植物间作区蚜虫与天敌类群的相互关系.生态学报，30(11):2899~2908
谢晓金，郝日明.2009.南京地区12种常绿阔叶树种冬季抗寒性动态变化.生态学报，29(4):2149~2154
徐胜，李建龙，何兴元.2006.冷季型草坪草的耐热性调控研究进展.应用生态学报，17(6):1117~1122
徐康，夏宜平，徐碧玉，林田，杨霞.2005.以电导法配合Logistic方程确定茶梅‘小玫瑰’的抗寒性.园艺学报，32(1):148~150
许瑛，陈发棣.2008.菊花8个品种的低温半致死温度及其抗寒适应性.园艺学报，35(4):559~564
邢全，石雷，刘保东.2004.枇杷叶荚蒾叶片解剖结构及其生态学意义.园艺学报，31(4):526~528
徐小万，雷建军，罗少波，曹必好，陈国菊.2009.辣椒苗期耐热耐湿鉴定方法的研究.核农学报，23(5):884~890
闫江艳，张永清，冯晓敏，李鹏，王海茹.2012.干旱胁迫及复水对不同黍稷品种根系生理特性的影响.西北植物学报，32(2):0348~0354
杨春雪，卓丽环，柳参奎.2008.植物显微及超微结构变化与其抗逆性关系的研究进展.分子植物育种，6(2):31~346
杨玉秀，常瑾，刘安成.2007.水分胁迫对几种球根花卉生理指标的影响.西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版)，35(12):77~80
易金鑫，侯喜林.2002.茄子耐热性遗传表现.园艺学报，29(6):529~532
尹慧，陈秋明，何秀丽，义鸣放.2007.短暂高温对百合植株抗氧化酶系统的影响.园艺学报，34(2):509~512
曾丽，赵梁军，张华丽，孙佳，赵子刚，杨帆，买和木提江.2010.万寿菊花器官发生与发育的观察.园艺学报，37(5):785~793
赵志红，吴红芝.2010.月季切花水分胁迫耐性差异与脯氨酸的关联性.林业科学，46(2):74~79
张桂莲，陈立云，张顺堂，刘国华，唐文邦，李梅华，雷东阳，陈信波.2008.高温胁迫对水稻花粉粒性状及花药显微结构的影响.生态学报，28(3):1089~1097
张桂莲，陈立云，张顺堂，肖应辉，贺治洲，雷东阳.2006.高温胁迫对水稻剑叶保护酶活性和膜透性的影响.作物学报，32(9):1306~1310
张嫦，宋航，何泽超，童安渝.2001.万寿菊中叶黄素的分析方法研究.四川大学学报（工程科学版），33(6):114~116
张仁和，薛吉全，浦军，赵兵，张兴华，郑友军，卜令铎.2011.干旱胁迫对玉米苗期植株生长和光合特性的影响.作物学报，37(3):521~528
张银秋，台培东，李培军，吴海燕，方英.2011.镉胁迫对万寿菊生长及生理生态特征的影响.环境工程学报，5(1):195~199
张淑勇，国静，刘炜，赵京考，谷思玉.2011.玉米苗期叶片主要生理生化指标对土壤水分的响应.玉米科学，9(5):68~72,77
张智，夏宜平，徐伟韦.2007.两种观赏草的自然失水胁迫初步研究.园艺学报，34(4):1029~1032
张西西，徐进，王涛.2008.万寿菊杂交一代遗传多态性SRAP标记分析.园艺学报，35(8):1221~1226
赵辉，戴廷波，姜东，荆奇，曹卫星.2007.高温下干旱和渍水对冬小麦花后旗叶光合特性和物质转运的影响.应用生态学报，18(2):333~338
周广，孙宝腾，张乐华，熊英杰，王书胜.2010.井冈山杜鹃叶片抗氧化系统对高温胁迫的响应.西北植物学报，30(6):1149~1156
周斯建，义鸣放，穆鼎.2005.高温胁迫下铁炮百合幼苗形态及生理反应的初步研究.园艺学报，32(1):145~147
周小梅，赵运林，周朴华.2007.匐匍翦股颖L293抗旱变异体的离体筛选与鉴定.草业学报，16(5):121~126
周智彬，李培军.2002.我国旱生植物的形态解剖学研究.干旱区研究，19(1):35~40
左闻韵，贺金生,韩梅.2005.植物气孔对大气CO2浓度和温度的升高的反映--基于在CO2浓度和温度梯度中生长的10种植物的观测.生态学报，25(3):565~574
Alexander, S A, Waldenmaier C M.2002. Suppression of Pratylenchus penetrans populations in potato andtomato using African marigolds. Journal of Nematology.34:130~134
Antolin M C， Yoller J, Sanehezdiaz M.1995. Efforts of temporary drought on nitrate fed andnitrogen-fixing alfalfa Plants. Plant Science,107:159~165
Apel K, Hirt H.2004. Reactive oxygen species: metabolism, oxidative stress and signal transduction.Annual Review of Plant Biology,55:373~399
Aranjuelo I, Molero G, Erice G, Avice J C, Nogués S.2010. Plant physiology and proteomics reveals theleaf response to drought in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), Journal of Experiment Botany,62,111~123
Asada K.1999. The water-water cycle in chloroplasts: scavenging of active oxygens and dissipation ofexcess photons. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology,50:601~639
Ashraf M，Saeed M M，Qureshi M J.1994. Tolerance to high temperature in cotton（Gossypium hirsutumL.）at initial growth stages. Environmental and Experimental Botany,34(3):275~283
Bartels D, Sunkars R.2005. Drought and salt tolerance in plants. Critical Review in Plant Science,24:23~58
Beerling D J. Chaloner W G.1993. The impact of atmospheric CO2and temperature changes on stomataldensity; obersivations from Quercus robur Lammas leaves. Annals of Botany,71:231~235
Berry J A, Bjorkman O.1980. Photosynthetic response and adaptation to temperature in higher plants.Annual Review of Plant Physiology,31:491~543
Bhatnagar-Mathur P, Jyostna Devi M, Vincent V, Sharma K.2009. Differential antioxidative responses intransgenic peanut bear no relationship to their superior transpiration efficiency under drought stressJournal of Plant Physiology,166:1207~1217
Bhattacharjee S.2005. Reactive oxygen species and oxidative burst: Roles in stress, senescence and signaltransduction in plants. Current Science,89:1113~1121
Bian S M, Jiang Y W.2009. Reactive oxygen species, antioxidant enzyme activities and gene expressionpatterns in leaves and roots of Kentucky bluegrass in response to drought stress and recovery. ScientiaHorticultural,120:264~270
Bréda N, Huc R, Granier A.2006. Temperate forest trees and stands under severe drought: a review ofecophysiological responses, adaptation processes and long term consequences. Annals of ForestScience,63:625~644
Buchner J.1999. Hsp90&Co.-a holding for folding. Trends in Biochemical Sciences,24:136~141
Camejo D, Rodriguez P, Morales M A, Dell Amico J M.2005. High temperature effects on photosyntheticactivity of two tomato cultivars with different heat susceptibility. Plant Physiology,162(3):281~289
Chartzoulakis K, Patakas A, Kofidis G, Bosabalidis A, Nastou A.2002. Water stress affects leaf anatomy,gas exchange, water relations and growth of two avocado cultivars. Scientia Hortirultural,95:39~50
Chen T H H, Murata N.2002. Enhancement of tolerance of abiotic stress by metabolic engineering ofbetaines and other compatible solutes. Current Opinion in Plant Biology,5:250~257
Colom M R, Vazzana C.2003. Photosynthesis and PS ⅱ functionality of drought-resistant and droughtsensitive weeping grass plants. Environmental and experimental botany,49(2):135~144
Conceicao V S, Falcao I P, Pinto G C.2002. Nutrient responses and glutamate and praline metabolism insunflower plants and calli under Na2SO4stress. Journal Plant Nutr Soil Science,165(3):366~372
Dafni A, Maués M M. A rapid and simple procedure to determine stigma receptivity.1998. Sexual PlantReproduction,11:177~180
Deeba F, Pandey A K, Ranjan S, Mishra A, Singh R, Sharma Y K, Shirke P K, Pandey V,2012.Physiological and proteomic responses of cotton (Gossypium herbaceum L.) to drought stress. PlantPhysiology and Biochemistry,53:6~18
Desikan R, Cheung M K, Bright J, et al.2004. ABA, hydrogen peroxide and nitricoxide signaling instomatal guard cells. Journal of Experiment Botany,55:205~212
Cavalcanti F R, Oliveira J T A, Martins-Miranda A S, Viegas R A, Silveira, J A G.2004. Superoxidedismutase, catalase and peroxidase activities do not confer protection against oxidative damage insalt-stressed cowpea leaves. New Phytologist,163:563~571
Chen Z, Gallie D R.2004. The ascorbic acid redox state controls guard cell signaling and stomatalmovement. Plant Cell,16:1143~1162
Crafts S J，Salvucci M E.2002. Sensitivity of photosynthesis in a C4plant maize, to heat stress. PlantPhysiology,129(4):1773~1780
Dharmagadda V S S, Naik S N, Mittal P K.2005. Larvicidal activity of Tagetes patula essential oil againstthree mosquito species. Bioresource Technology,96(11):1235~1240
Eva S R, Mamar R W, Luis M C, Begona B, Juan J R, Miguel A R, Luis R, Juan M R.2010. Genotypicdifferences in some physiological parameters symptomatic for oxidative stress under moderatedrought in tomato plants. Plant Science,178:30~40
Farquhar G D，Oleary M H，Berry J A.1982. On the relationship between carbon isotope discriminationand the intercellular carbon dioxide concentration in leaves. Australian Journal of Plant Phisiology,9:121~137
Farquhar G D，Sharkey T D.1982. Stomatal conductance and Photosynthesis. Annual Review PlantPhysiology,33:317~345
Gao Y X, Nagy B, Liu X.2009. Supercritical CO2extraction of lute in esters from marigold (Tagetes erectaL.) enhanced by ultrasound. The Journal of Supercritical Fluids,49(3):345~350
Hatice G, Atilla E.2004. Effect of heat stress on peroxidase activity and total protein content in strawberryplants. Plant Science,166:739~744
Havaux M.1996. Short-term responses of photosystemⅡto heat stress. Photosynthesis Research,47:85~97
Hasegawa P M, Bressan R A, Zhu J K.2000. Plant cellular and molecular responses to high salinity.Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology,51:1463~1499
Hetherington A M, Woodward F I.2003. The role of stomata in sensing and driving environmental change.Nature,424:901~908
Horling F, Lamkemeyer P, Konnig J.2003. Divergent light, ascorbate, and oxidative stress dependentregulation of expression of the peroxiredoxin gene family in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiology,131:317~325
Hsiao, T C, Xu, I K.2000. Sensitivity of growth of roots versus leaves to water stress: biophysical analysisand relation to water transport. Journal of Experiment Botany,51(35):1595~1616
Imlay J A, Linn S.1988. DNA damage and oxygen radical toxicity. Science,240:1302~1309
Ishikawa A, Tanaka H, Nakai M, Asahi T.2003. Deletion of a chaperon in60gene leads to cell death in theArabidopsis lesion initiation1mutant. Plant and Cell Physiology,44(3):255~261
James K, Roberts J, Key L.1991. Isolation and characterization of a soybean HSP70gene. Plant MolecularBiology,16:671~683
Jiang Y, Huang B.2001. Drought and heat stress injury to two cool-season turfgrass in relation toantioxidant metabolism and lipid peroxidation. Crop Science,41:436~442
Jones M M.1978. Osmotic adjustment in leaves of sorghum in response to water deficits. AustralianJournal of Plant Physiology,61:122~126
Jung S Y.2004. Variation in antioxidant metabolism of young and mature leaves of Arabidopsis thalianasubjected to drought. Plant Science,166:459~466
Joel G, Aplet G, Vitousek P M.1994. Leaf morphology along environmental gradients in HawaiianMetrosideros polymorpha. Biotropica,26:17~22
Jose A H, Maria A.2001. Antioxidant systems and O.-2/H2O2production in apoplast of pea leaves. PlantPhysiology,127:817~831
Klieh M G.2000. Leaf variation sin Elaeagnus angustifolia related to environrnental heterogeneity.Environmental and Experimental Botany,44:171~183
Krause G H, Santarius K A.1975. Relative thermostability of the chlrop last envelope. Planta,127:285~299
Lal K, Minhas P S, Chaturvedi S R K.2008. Extraction of cadmium and tolerance o f three annual cutflowers on Cd-contaminated soils. Bioresource Technology,99(5):1006~1011
Larson, R A.1988. The antioxidants of higher plants. Phytochemistry,27:969~978
Lima A L S, DaMatta F M, Pinheiro H A.2002. Photochemical responses and oxidative stress in two clonesof Coffea canephora under water deficit conditions. Environmental and Experimental Botany,47:239~247
Martinez J P, Silva H, Ledent J F.2007. Effect of drought stress on the osmot ic adjustment, cell wallelasticity and cel l volume of six cultivars of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). EuropeanJournal of Agronomy,6(1):30~38
Masaaki O, Kiyoshi O.2001. Effects of sugar on vegetative development and floral transition inarabidopsis. Plant Physiology,127:252~261
Michael A M, Joe L K.1987. Synethesis of the low molecular weight heat shock protein in plants. PlantPhysiology,84:1007~1017
Michel R S, Ricardo A, Yaumara M, Ricardo P, Juan M R L.2010. The arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosisenhances the photosynthetic efficiency and the antioxidative response of rice plants subjected todrought stress. Journal of Plant Physiology,167:862~869
Mittler R.2002. Oxidative stress antioxidants and stress tolerance, Trends in Plant Science,7:405-410
Moran J F, Becana M, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Frechilla S, Klucas R V,1994. Aparicio-Tejo P. Drought inducesoxidative stress in pea plants, Planta,194:346~352
Mullineaux P M, Rausch T.2005. Glutathione, photosynthesis and redox regulation of stress-responsivegene expression. Photosynthesis Research,86(3):459~474
Natarajan N, Cork A, Boomathi N.2006. Cold aqueous extracts of African marigold, Tagetes erecta forcontrol tomato root knot nematode, Meloidogyne in cognita. Crop Protection,25(11):1210~1213
Nakano K, Asada K.1981. Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate specific peroxidase in spinachchloroplasts. Plant and Cell Physiology,22:867~880
Nayyar H, Gupta D.2006. Differential sensitivity of C3and C4plants to water deficit stress: Associationwith oxidative stress and antioxidants．Environmental and Experimental Botany,58(3):106~113
Nielsen D C, Vigil M F, Benjamin J G.2009. The variable response of dry land corn yield to soil watercontent at planting. Agricultural Water Management,96:330~336
Noctor G, Arisim A C, Jouanin L, Kunert K J, Rennenberg G H, Foyer C H.1998. Glutathione:biosynthesis, metabolism and relationship to stress tolerance explored in transformed plants. Journalof Experimental Botany,49(6):623~647
Orr W, Keller W A, Singh J.1986. Induction of freezing tolerance in an embryogenic cell suspensionculture of Brassica napus by abscisic acid at room temperature. Plant physiology,126:23~32
Ohkawa, H, Ohishi, N, Yaqi, K.1979. Assay for lipid peroxides in animal tissue by thiobarbituric acidreaction. Analytical Biochemistry,95:351~358
Ozkur O, Ozdemir F, Bor M, Turkan I.2009. Physiochemical and antioxidant responses of the perennialxerophyte Capparis ovata Desf. to drought. Environmental and Experimental Botany,66:487~492
Passioura J B.1988. Root signals control leaf expansion in wheat seedling growing in drying soil Aust.Plant Physiology,15:687~693.
Pearson S, Parket A, Adams S R.1995. The effects of temperature on the flower size of pansy (Violawittrockiana Gams). Journal of Horticultural Science,70(2):183~190.
Pearce D W, Millard S, Bray D F, Rood S B.2005. Stomatal characteristics of riparian poplar species in asemi-arid environment. Tree Physiology,26:211~218
Quackenbush F W, Miller S L.1972. Composition and analysis of the carotenoids in marigold petals.Association of Analytical Chemists Journal,55:617~621
Reddy K R, Robana R R, Hodges H F.1998. Interactions of CO2enrichment and temperature on cottongrowth and leaf characteristics. Environmental and Experimental Botany,39:117~129
Reddy A R, Chaitanya K V,2004. Vivekanandan M. Drought-induced responses of photosynthesis andantioxidant metabolism in higher plants, Journal Plant Physiology,161:1189~1202
Ruellanda E, Zachowskia A.2010. How plants sense temperature. Environmental and Experimental Botany,69:225~232
Scandalios J.1997. Oxidative stress and the molecular biology of antioxidant defenses. Cold SpringHarbor Laboratory Press,11(26):527~568
Shi W M, Muramoto, Uedaa Y A, Takabe T.2001. Cloning of peroxisomal ascorbate peroxidase gene frombarley and enhanced thermo tolerance by over expressing in Arabidop sisthaliana. Gene,273:2~27
Shao H B, Liang Z S, Shao M A, Sun Q.2005. Dynamic changes of anti-oxidative enzymes of10wheatgenotypes at soil water deficits. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces,42:187~195
Shao H B, Liang Z S, Shao M A.2006. Osmotic regulation of10wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes atsoil water deficits. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces,47:132~139
Shao H B, Chu L Y, Jaleel C A, Zhao C X.2008. Water-deficit stress-induced anatomical changes in higherplants. Comptes Rendus Bioloogies,331(3):215~225
Sharp R E, Poroyko V, Hejlek L G, Spollen W G, Springer G K, Bohnert H J, Nguyen H T.2004. Rootgrowth maintenance during water deficits: physiology to functional genomies. Journal of ExperimentBotany,55:2343~2351
Sinsawat V, Leipnr J, Stamp P, Fracheboud Y.2004. Effect of heat stress on the photo synthetic apparatus inmaize (Zea mays L.) grown at control or high temperature. Environmental and Experimental Botany,52:123~129
Souza R P,Machado E C, Silva J A B.2004. Photosynthetic gas exchange, chlorophyll fluorescence andsome associated metabolic changes in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) during water stress and recovery.Environment al and Experiment al Botany,51:45~56
Sung D Y, Guy C L.2003. Physiological and molecular assessment of altered expression of Hsc70-1inArabidop sis. evidence for pleiotropic consequences. Plant Physiology,132:979~987
Tanaka K, Suda Y, Kondo N.1985. Ozone tolerance and the ascorbate dependent hydrogen peroxidedecomposing system in chloroplasts. Plant and Cell Physiology,26:1425~1431
Thumma B R, Naidu B P, Chandra A, Cameron D F, Bahnisch L M.2001. Identification of causalrelationship among traits related to drought resistance in Stylosanthes scabra using QTL analysis.Journal of Experimental Botany,52:203~214
Turkan I, Bor M, Ozdemir F, Koca H.2005. Differential responses of lipid peroxidation and antioxidants inthe leaves of drought tolerant P. acutifolius Gray and drought sensitive P. vulgaris L. subjected to PEGmediated water stress. Plant Science,168:22~3231
Vitale A, Bielli A, Ceriotti A.1995. The binding protein associates with monomeric phaseolin. PlantPhysiology,107:1411~1418
Xu Q, Huang B.2001. Morphysiological and physiological characteristics associated with heat tolerance increeping bentgrass. Crop Science,41:127~133
Wang W, Vinocur B, Shoseyov O, Altman A.2004. Role of plant heat-shock proteins and molecularchaperones in the abiotic stress response.Trends in Plant Science,9:244~252
Wahid A, Gelani S, Ashraf M, Foolad M R.2007. Heat tolerance in plants: An overview. Environmentaland Experimental Botany61:199~223
Zhang J L, Flowers T J, Wang S M.2010. Mechanisms of sodium uptake by roots of higher plant. PlantSoil,326(1):45~60
Zlatev Z S, Lidon F C, Ramalho J C, Yordanov I T.2006. Comparison of resistance to drought of threebean cultivars. Biologia Plantarum,50(3):389~394
曹福亮，郑军，汪贵斌，戴文圣.2008.高温胁迫下14个银杏品种的耐热性.林业科学，44(12):35~38
陈莉，周连霞，马锋旺，梁东，华智锐.2008.转MnSOD基因仙客来植株的获得及其对高温胁迫的抗性.西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版)，6(3):155~160
杜磊，赵尊练，巩振辉，郭建伟.2010.水分胁迫对线辣椒叶片渗透调节作用的影响.干旱地区农业研究，28(3):188~190
范苏鲁，苑兆和，冯立娟，王晓慧，丁雪梅，甄红丽.2011.干旱胁迫对大丽花生理生化指标的影响.应用生态学报，22(3):651~657
范志宏，郭春绒，王金胜.2010.万寿菊根提取物对西瓜枯萎病菌的抑菌活性成分及作用机理研究.植物病理学报，40(2):195~201
高焕章，吴楚，李申如，周瑞锋.2002.综合指数法在核桃选种中应用研究.林业科学，38(3):171~176
高松，苏培玺，严巧娣，丁松爽，张岭梅.2009. C4荒漠植物猪毛菜与木本猪毛菜的叶片解剖结构及光合生理特征.植物生态学报，33(2):347~354
高天,马锋旺,梁东.2006.高温胁迫对两个仙客来品种抗氧化系统的影响.西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版)，34(6):82~85
高彦萍，冯莹，马志军，李强，张秀娟.2007.水分胁迫下不同抗旱类型大豆叶片气孔特性变化研究.干旱地区农业研究，25(2):77~79
葛体达，隋方功，张金政，吕银燕，周广胜.2005.玉米根、叶质膜透性和叶片水分对土壤干旱胁迫的反应.西北植物学报，25(3):507~512
韩建秋,王秀峰,张志国.2008.土壤水分梯度对白三叶光合作用和根系分布的影响.生态学报，28(2):494~499
何淼，李文鹤，卓丽环.2011.野菊幼苗对自然干旱胁迫的生理响应.草业科学，28(8):1456~1460
胡伟娟，张启翔，潘会堂，董玲玲.2010.报春叶片解剖结构与耐热性的关系.华中农业大学学报，29(3):363~368
回瑞华，侯冬岩，李铁纯，刘晓媛，刁全平.2009.万寿菊不同部位挥发性化学成分比较研究.分析试验室，28(7):54~57
黄锦文，陈冬梅，郑红艳，骆娟，林争春，林文雄.2009.暖季型草坪草对高温胁迫的生理响应.中国生态农业学报，17(5):964~967
黄珊珊，廖景平.2010.热胁迫下羽叶薰衣草植物腺毛发育的超微结构.基因组学与应用生物学，29(1):97~102
姜义宝，崔国文，李红.2005.干旱胁迫下外源钙对苜蓿抗旱相关生理指标的影响.草业学报，14(2):32~36
巨云为，樊培峰，奚月明，薛中官.2010.万寿菊提取物对松材线虫的毒杀作用.浙江林学院学报，27(2):316~319
孔兰静，张志国.2009.三种观赏草对土壤干旱胁迫的生理响应[博士学位论文].青岛：山东农业大学
寇建村，杨文权，贾志宽，狄升蒙，韩清芳.2008.不同紫花苜蓿品种叶片旱生结构的比较.西北农林科技大学学报（自然科学版），36(8):67~72
李大婧，刘春泉.2005.万寿菊叶黄素的提取及分析方法研究进展.食品科学，26(9):582~585
李大婧，刘春泉，方桂珍.2007.不同品系万寿菊花中叶黄素和叶黄素酯含量的测定.林产化学与工业，27(2):105~108
李贵全，张海燕，季兰，赵二开，刘建兵，李玲，张家蓉.2006.不同大豆品种抗旱性综合评价，应用生态学报，17(12):2408~2412
李敏，王维华，王然，刘润进.2004.高温胁迫对菠菜叶片保护酶活性和膜透性的影响.园艺学报，31(1):99~100
李娜，房伟民，陈发棣，陈素梅，陈煜.2010.切花寒菊小花对低温胁迫的生理响应及其抗寒性分析，西北植物学报，30(4):0645~0651
李福荣.2005.万寿菊雄性不育的遗传与应用研究.[博士学位论文].北京：北京林业大学
李宁毅，孙莉娟，刘冰.2010. S3307及其与SA复配对万寿菊穴盘苗生长和抗性生理的影响.种子，29(8):38~41
李为观，杨寅桂，魏跃，孟佳丽.2010.热胁迫下黄瓜幼苗生理生化指标变化CSHSP70基因表达.南京农业大学学报，33(3):47~50
李晓锋，侯瑞贤，朱玉英，侯喜林，朱红芳.2009.高温胁迫对大白菜叶绿素荧光特性的影响.农业工程学报，25（增刊1）:49~54
李晓芬，尚庆茂，张志刚，王立浩，张宝玺.2008.多元统计分析方法在辣椒品种耐盐性评价中的应用.园艺学报，35(3):351~356
李永红，魏玉香，谷茂.2008.水杨酸预处理对鸡冠花幼苗热胁迫的生理效应.西北植物学报，28(11):2257~2262
李振军，李景富.2010.耐热番茄Hsf24基因克隆与分析.东北农业大学学报，41(3):29~32.
梁雪.2009.高温胁迫对夏大葱PSⅡ光化学活性的影响.[硕士学位论文].青岛：山东农业大学
吕金印，郭涛.2010.水分胁迫对不同品种甜高粱幼苗保护酶活性等生理特性的影响.干旱地区农业研究，28(4):89~93
柳新红，何小勇，苏冬梅，魏来，袁德义，王军峰.2007.翅荚木种源抗寒性综合评价体系的构建与应用.林业科学，43(10):45~50
刘景辉，赵海超，任永峰，张向前.2009.土壤水分胁迫对燕麦叶片渗透调节物质含量的影响.西北植物学报，29(7):1432~1436
刘强，陈玲，邱家洲，赵建夫.2010.污泥堆肥对园林植物生长及重金属积累的影响.同济大学学报(自然科学版)，38(6):870~876
刘祖棋，张石城.1993.植物抗性生理学.北京：中国农业出版社，198~219
马莉，殷秀琴.2010.污泥蚯蚓粪对万寿菊生长发育的影响.应用生态学报，21(5):1346~1350
毛胜利，杜永臣，王孝宣，朱德蔚.2005.高温胁迫下番茄体内ABA水平的变化及其对花粉萌发的影响.园艺学报，32(2):234~238
孟林，尚春艳，毛培春，张国芳，安沙舟.2009.偃麦草属植物种质材料苗期耐盐性综合评价，草业学报，18(4):67~74
孟庆立，关周博，冯佰利，柴岩，胡银岗.2009.谷子抗旱相关性状的主成分与模糊聚类分析.中国农业科学，42(8):2667~2675
孟庆杰，王光全，董绍锋.2004.桃叶片组织解剖结构特征与其抗旱性关系的研究.干旱地区农业研究，22(3):123~126
莫健彬，陈必胜，黄梅，胡永红.2007.高温对玉簪品种部分生理指标的影响研究.种子，26(5):48~51
彭伟秀，王文全，梁海永.2003.水分胁迫对甘草营养器官解剖构造的影响.河北农业大学学报，26(3):46~48
齐迎春，宁国贵，包满珠.2007.应用ISSR分子标记和表型性状评价孔雀草自交系的遗传关系.中国农业科学，40(6):1236~1241
钱永强，孙振元，韩蕾，巨关升.2010.野牛草叶片活性氧及其清除系统对水分胁迫的响应.生态学报，30(7):1920~1926
秦爱国，高俊杰，于贤昌.2009.温度胁迫对马铃薯叶片抗坏血酸代谢系统的影响.应用生态学报，20(12):2964~2970
单长卷，韩蕊莲，梁宗锁.2012.干旱胁迫下黄土高原4种乡土禾草抗氧化特性.生态学报，32(4):174~1184
师光禄，王有年，王鸿雷，赵莉蔺，刘素琪.2007.万寿菊根提取物对山楂叶螨谷胱甘肽S2转移酶和蛋白酶及蛋白质含量的影响.应用生态学报，18(2):400~404
史刚荣，程雪莲，刘蕾.2006.扁担木叶片和次生木质部解剖和水分生理特征的可塑性.应用生态学报，17(10):1801~1806
史燕山，骆建霞，王煦，赵坤平，刘玉冬，黄俊轩.2005.5种草本地被植物抗旱性研究.西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版)，33(5):130~134
石永红，万里强，刘建宁，王运琦，郭锐，吴欣明，李向林.2010.多年生黑麦草抗旱性主成分及隶属函数分析.草地学报，18(5):69~672
孙铁军，苏日古嘎，马万里，武菊英.2008.10种禾草苗期抗旱性的比较研究.草业学报，17(4):42~49
唐道城，唐楠，唐新桥.2008.万寿菊资源观赏性状的遗传聚类分析.青海大学学报(自然科学版)，26(5):45~47
汪炳良，徐敏，史庆华，曹家树.2004.高温胁迫对早熟花椰菜叶片抗氧化系统和叶绿素及其荧光参数的影响.中国农业科学，37(8):1245~1250
王冬梅，许向阳，李景富，崔琳.2004.热胁迫对番茄叶肉细胞叶绿体超微结构的影响.园艺学报,31(6):820~821
王利军，黄卫东，战吉成.2003.水杨酸和高温锻炼与葡萄抗热性及抗氧化的关系.园艺学报，30(4):452~454
王志和，于丽艳，曹德航.2005.短期高温处理对大白菜几个生理指标的影响.西北农业学报，14(3):82~85
王军，周美学，许如根，吕超，黄祖六.2007.大麦耐湿性鉴定指标和评价方法研究.中国农业科学,40(10):2145~2152
王勇.2010.黄土高原四个菊科蒿属种耗水规律及抗旱特性的研究.[硕士学位论文].杨凌：西北农林科技大学
王玉刚，阿不来提齐曼.2006.两狗牙根品种对干旱胁迫反应的差异.草业学报，15(4):58~64
王泽立，张恒悦，阎先喜.1998.玉米抗旱品种的形态解剖学研究.西北植物学报，18(4):581~583
魏玉香，李永红，谷茂，刘晓辉.2008.鸡冠花幼苗热胁迫耐性与其SOD之间的关联.西北植物学报，28(10):2055~2061
魏巍，孔云，张玉萍，王美超，李振茹，姚允聪.2010.梨园芳香植物间作区蚜虫与天敌类群的相互关系.生态学报，30(11):2899~2908
谢晓金，郝日明.2009.南京地区12种常绿阔叶树种冬季抗寒性动态变化.生态学报，29(4):2149~2154
徐胜，李建龙，何兴元.2006.冷季型草坪草的耐热性调控研究进展.应用生态学报，17(6):1117~1122
徐康，夏宜平，徐碧玉，林田，杨霞.2005.以电导法配合Logistic方程确定茶梅‘小玫瑰’的抗寒性.园艺学报，32(1):148~150
许瑛，陈发棣.2008.菊花8个品种的低温半致死温度及其抗寒适应性.园艺学报，35(4):559~564
邢全，石雷，刘保东.2004.枇杷叶荚蒾叶片解剖结构及其生态学意义.园艺学报，31(4):526~528
徐小万，雷建军，罗少波，曹必好，陈国菊.2009.辣椒苗期耐热耐湿鉴定方法的研究.核农学报，23(5):884~890
闫江艳，张永清，冯晓敏，李鹏，王海茹.2012.干旱胁迫及复水对不同黍稷品种根系生理特性的影响.西北植物学报，32(2):0348~0354
杨春雪，卓丽环，柳参奎.2008.植物显微及超微结构变化与其抗逆性关系的研究进展.分子植物育种，6(2):31~346
杨玉秀，常瑾，刘安成.2007.水分胁迫对几种球根花卉生理指标的影响.西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版)，35(12):77~80
易金鑫，侯喜林.2002.茄子耐热性遗传表现.园艺学报，29(6):529~532
尹慧，陈秋明，何秀丽，义鸣放.2007.短暂高温对百合植株抗氧化酶系统的影响.园艺学报，34(2):509~512
曾丽，赵梁军，张华丽，孙佳，赵子刚，杨帆，买和木提江.2010.万寿菊花器官发生与发育的观察.园艺学报，37(5):785~793
赵志红，吴红芝.2010.月季切花水分胁迫耐性差异与脯氨酸的关联性.林业科学，46(2):74~79
张桂莲，陈立云，张顺堂，刘国华，唐文邦，李梅华，雷东阳，陈信波.2008.高温胁迫对水稻花粉粒性状及花药显微结构的影响.生态学报，28(3):1089~1097
张桂莲，陈立云，张顺堂，肖应辉，贺治洲，雷东阳.2006.高温胁迫对水稻剑叶保护酶活性和膜透性的影响.作物学报，32(9):1306~1310
张嫦，宋航，何泽超，童安渝.2001.万寿菊中叶黄素的分析方法研究.四川大学学报（工程科学版），33(6):114~116
张仁和，薛吉全，浦军，赵兵，张兴华，郑友军，卜令铎.2011.干旱胁迫对玉米苗期植株生长和光合特性的影响.作物学报，37(3):521~528
张银秋，台培东，李培军，吴海燕，方英.2011.镉胁迫对万寿菊生长及生理生态特征的影响.环境工程学报，5(1):195~199
张淑勇，国静，刘炜，赵京考，谷思玉.2011.玉米苗期叶片主要生理生化指标对土壤水分的响应.玉米科学，9(5):68~72,77
张智，夏宜平，徐伟韦.2007.两种观赏草的自然失水胁迫初步研究.园艺学报，34(4):1029~1032
张西西，徐进，王涛.2008.万寿菊杂交一代遗传多态性SRAP标记分析.园艺学报，35(8):1221~1226
赵辉，戴廷波，姜东，荆奇，曹卫星.2007.高温下干旱和渍水对冬小麦花后旗叶光合特性和物质转运的影响.应用生态学报，18(2):333~338
周广，孙宝腾，张乐华，熊英杰，王书胜.2010.井冈山杜鹃叶片抗氧化系统对高温胁迫的响应.西北植物学报，30(6):1149~1156
周斯建，义鸣放，穆鼎.2005.高温胁迫下铁炮百合幼苗形态及生理反应的初步研究.园艺学报，32(1):145~147
周小梅，赵运林，周朴华.2007.匐匍翦股颖L293抗旱变异体的离体筛选与鉴定.草业学报，16(5):121~126
周智彬，李培军.2002.我国旱生植物的形态解剖学研究.干旱区研究，19(1):35~40
左闻韵，贺金生,韩梅.2005.植物气孔对大气CO2浓度和温度的升高的反映--基于在CO2浓度和温度梯度中生长的10种植物的观测.生态学报，25(3):565~574
Alexander, S A, Waldenmaier C M.2002. Suppression of Pratylenchus penetrans populations in potato andtomato using African marigolds. Journal of Nematology.34:130~134
Antolin M C， Yoller J, Sanehezdiaz M.1995. Efforts of temporary drought on nitrate fed andnitrogen-fixing alfalfa Plants. Plant Science,107:159~165
Apel K, Hirt H.2004. Reactive oxygen species: metabolism, oxidative stress and signal transduction.Annual Review of Plant Biology,55:373~399
Aranjuelo I, Molero G, Erice G, Avice J C, Nogués S.2010. Plant physiology and proteomics reveals theleaf response to drought in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), Journal of Experiment Botany,62,111~123
Asada K.1999. The water-water cycle in chloroplasts: scavenging of active oxygens and dissipation ofexcess photons. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology,50:601~639
Ashraf M，Saeed M M，Qureshi M J.1994. Tolerance to high temperature in cotton（Gossypium hirsutumL.）at initial growth stages. Environmental and Experimental Botany,34(3):275~283
Bartels D, Sunkars R.2005. Drought and salt tolerance in plants. Critical Review in Plant Science,24:23~58
Beerling D J. Chaloner W G.1993. The impact of atmospheric CO2and temperature changes on stomataldensity; obersivations from Quercus robur Lammas leaves. Annals of Botany,71:231~235
Berry J A, Bjorkman O.1980. Photosynthetic response and adaptation to temperature in higher plants.Annual Review of Plant Physiology,31:491~543
Bhatnagar-Mathur P, Jyostna Devi M, Vincent V, Sharma K.2009. Differential antioxidative responses intransgenic peanut bear no relationship to their superior transpiration efficiency under drought stressJournal of Plant Physiology,166:1207~1217
Bhattacharjee S.2005. Reactive oxygen species and oxidative burst: Roles in stress, senescence and signaltransduction in plants. Current Science,89:1113~1121
Bian S M, Jiang Y W.2009. Reactive oxygen species, antioxidant enzyme activities and gene expressionpatterns in leaves and roots of Kentucky bluegrass in response to drought stress and recovery. ScientiaHorticultural,120:264~270
Bréda N, Huc R, Granier A.2006. Temperate forest trees and stands under severe drought: a review ofecophysiological responses, adaptation processes and long term consequences. Annals of ForestScience,63:625~644
Buchner J.1999. Hsp90&Co.-a holding for folding. Trends in Biochemical Sciences,24:136~141
Camejo D, Rodriguez P, Morales M A, Dell Amico J M.2005. High temperature effects on photosyntheticactivity of two tomato cultivars with different heat susceptibility. Plant Physiology,162(3):281~289
Chartzoulakis K, Patakas A, Kofidis G, Bosabalidis A, Nastou A.2002. Water stress affects leaf anatomy,gas exchange, water relations and growth of two avocado cultivars. Scientia Hortirultural,95:39~50
Chen T H H, Murata N.2002. Enhancement of tolerance of abiotic stress by metabolic engineering ofbetaines and other compatible solutes. Current Opinion in Plant Biology,5:250~257
Colom M R, Vazzana C.2003. Photosynthesis and PS ⅱ functionality of drought-resistant and droughtsensitive weeping grass plants. Environmental and experimental botany,49(2):135~144
Conceicao V S, Falcao I P, Pinto G C.2002. Nutrient responses and glutamate and praline metabolism insunflower plants and calli under Na2SO4stress. Journal Plant Nutr Soil Science,165(3):366~372
Dafni A, Maués M M. A rapid and simple procedure to determine stigma receptivity.1998. Sexual PlantReproduction,11:177~180
Deeba F, Pandey A K, Ranjan S, Mishra A, Singh R, Sharma Y K, Shirke P K, Pandey V,2012.Physiological and proteomic responses of cotton (Gossypium herbaceum L.) to drought stress. PlantPhysiology and Biochemistry,53:6~18
Desikan R, Cheung M K, Bright J, et al.2004. ABA, hydrogen peroxide and nitricoxide signaling instomatal guard cells. Journal of Experiment Botany,55:205~212
Cavalcanti F R, Oliveira J T A, Martins-Miranda A S, Viegas R A, Silveira, J A G.2004. Superoxidedismutase, catalase and peroxidase activities do not confer protection against oxidative damage insalt-stressed cowpea leaves. New Phytologist,163:563~571
Chen Z, Gallie D R.2004. The ascorbic acid redox state controls guard cell signaling and stomatalmovement. Plant Cell,16:1143~1162
Crafts S J，Salvucci M E.2002. Sensitivity of photosynthesis in a C4plant maize, to heat stress. PlantPhysiology,129(4):1773~1780
Dharmagadda V S S, Naik S N, Mittal P K.2005. Larvicidal activity of Tagetes patula essential oil againstthree mosquito species. Bioresource Technology,96(11):1235~1240
Eva S R, Mamar R W, Luis M C, Begona B, Juan J R, Miguel A R, Luis R, Juan M R.2010. Genotypicdifferences in some physiological parameters symptomatic for oxidative stress under moderatedrought in tomato plants. Plant Science,178:30~40
Farquhar G D，Oleary M H，Berry J A.1982. On the relationship between carbon isotope discriminationand the intercellular carbon dioxide concentration in leaves. Australian Journal of Plant Phisiology,9:121~137
Farquhar G D，Sharkey T D.1982. Stomatal conductance and Photosynthesis. Annual Review PlantPhysiology,33:317~345
Gao Y X, Nagy B, Liu X.2009. Supercritical CO2extraction of lute in esters from marigold (Tagetes erectaL.) enhanced by ultrasound. The Journal of Supercritical Fluids,49(3):345~350
Hatice G, Atilla E.2004. Effect of heat stress on peroxidase activity and total protein content in strawberryplants. Plant Science,166:739~744
Havaux M.1996. Short-term responses of photosystemⅡto heat stress. Photosynthesis Research,47:85~97
Hasegawa P M, Bressan R A, Zhu J K.2000. Plant cellular and molecular responses to high salinity.Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology,51:1463~1499
Hetherington A M, Woodward F I.2003. The role of stomata in sensing and driving environmental change.Nature,424:901~908
Horling F, Lamkemeyer P, Konnig J.2003. Divergent light, ascorbate, and oxidative stress dependentregulation of expression of the peroxiredoxin gene family in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiology,131:317~325
Hsiao, T C, Xu, I K.2000. Sensitivity of growth of roots versus leaves to water stress: biophysical analysisand relation to water transport. Journal of Experiment Botany,51(35):1595~1616
Imlay J A, Linn S.1988. DNA damage and oxygen radical toxicity. Science,240:1302~1309
Ishikawa A, Tanaka H, Nakai M, Asahi T.2003. Deletion of a chaperon in60gene leads to cell death in theArabidopsis lesion initiation1mutant. Plant and Cell Physiology,44(3):255~261
James K, Roberts J, Key L.1991. Isolation and characterization of a soybean HSP70gene. Plant MolecularBiology,16:671~683
Jiang Y, Huang B.2001. Drought and heat stress injury to two cool-season turfgrass in relation toantioxidant metabolism and lipid peroxidation. Crop Science,41:436~442
Jones M M.1978. Osmotic adjustment in leaves of sorghum in response to water deficits. AustralianJournal of Plant Physiology,61:122~126
Jung S Y.2004. Variation in antioxidant metabolism of young and mature leaves of Arabidopsis thalianasubjected to drought. Plant Science,166:459~466
Joel G, Aplet G, Vitousek P M.1994. Leaf morphology along environmental gradients in HawaiianMetrosideros polymorpha. Biotropica,26:17~22
Jose A H, Maria A.2001. Antioxidant systems and O.-2/H2O2production in apoplast of pea leaves. PlantPhysiology,127:817~831
Klieh M G.2000. Leaf variation sin Elaeagnus angustifolia related to environrnental heterogeneity.Environmental and Experimental Botany,44:171~183
Krause G H, Santarius K A.1975. Relative thermostability of the chlrop last envelope. Planta,127:285~299
Lal K, Minhas P S, Chaturvedi S R K.2008. Extraction of cadmium and tolerance o f three annual cutflowers on Cd-contaminated soils. Bioresource Technology,99(5):1006~1011
Larson, R A.1988. The antioxidants of higher plants. Phytochemistry,27:969~978
Lima A L S, DaMatta F M, Pinheiro H A.2002. Photochemical responses and oxidative stress in two clonesof Coffea canephora under water deficit conditions. Environmental and Experimental Botany,47:239~247
Martinez J P, Silva H, Ledent J F.2007. Effect of drought stress on the osmot ic adjustment, cell wallelasticity and cel l volume of six cultivars of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). EuropeanJournal of Agronomy,6(1):30~38
Masaaki O, Kiyoshi O.2001. Effects of sugar on vegetative development and floral transition inarabidopsis. Plant Physiology,127:252~261
Michael A M, Joe L K.1987. Synethesis of the low molecular weight heat shock protein in plants. PlantPhysiology,84:1007~1017
Michel R S, Ricardo A, Yaumara M, Ricardo P, Juan M R L.2010. The arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosisenhances the photosynthetic efficiency and the antioxidative response of rice plants subjected todrought stress. Journal of Plant Physiology,167:862~869
Mittler R.2002. Oxidative stress antioxidants and stress tolerance, Trends in Plant Science,7:405-410
Moran J F, Becana M, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Frechilla S, Klucas R V,1994. Aparicio-Tejo P. Drought inducesoxidative stress in pea plants, Planta,194:346~352
Mullineaux P M, Rausch T.2005. Glutathione, photosynthesis and redox regulation of stress-responsivegene expression. Photosynthesis Research,86(3):459~474
Natarajan N, Cork A, Boomathi N.2006. Cold aqueous extracts of African marigold, Tagetes erecta forcontrol tomato root knot nematode, Meloidogyne in cognita. Crop Protection,25(11):1210~1213
Nakano K, Asada K.1981. Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate specific peroxidase in spinachchloroplasts. Plant and Cell Physiology,22:867~880
Nayyar H, Gupta D.2006. Differential sensitivity of C3and C4plants to water deficit stress: Associationwith oxidative stress and antioxidants．Environmental and Experimental Botany,58(3):106~113
Nielsen D C, Vigil M F, Benjamin J G.2009. The variable response of dry land corn yield to soil watercontent at planting. Agricultural Water Management,96:330~336
Noctor G, Arisim A C, Jouanin L, Kunert K J, Rennenberg G H, Foyer C H.1998. Glutathione:biosynthesis, metabolism and relationship to stress tolerance explored in transformed plants. Journalof Experimental Botany,49(6):623~647
Orr W, Keller W A, Singh J.1986. Induction of freezing tolerance in an embryogenic cell suspensionculture of Brassica napus by abscisic acid at room temperature. Plant physiology,126:23~32
Ohkawa, H, Ohishi, N, Yaqi, K.1979. Assay for lipid peroxides in animal tissue by thiobarbituric acidreaction. Analytical Biochemistry,95:351~358
Ozkur O, Ozdemir F, Bor M, Turkan I.2009. Physiochemical and antioxidant responses of the perennialxerophyte Capparis ovata Desf. to drought. Environmental and Experimental Botany,66:487~492
Passioura J B.1988. Root signals control leaf expansion in wheat seedling growing in drying soil Aust.Plant Physiology,15:687~693.
Pearson S, Parket A, Adams S R.1995. The effects of temperature on the flower size of pansy (Violawittrockiana Gams). Journal of Horticultural Science,70(2):183~190.
Pearce D W, Millard S, Bray D F, Rood S B.2005. Stomatal characteristics of riparian poplar species in asemi-arid environment. Tree Physiology,26:211~218
Quackenbush F W, Miller S L.1972. Composition and analysis of the carotenoids in marigold petals.Association of Analytical Chemists Journal,55:617~621
Reddy K R, Robana R R, Hodges H F.1998. Interactions of CO2enrichment and temperature on cottongrowth and leaf characteristics. Environmental and Experimental Botany,39:117~129
Reddy A R, Chaitanya K V,2004. Vivekanandan M. Drought-induced responses of photosynthesis andantioxidant metabolism in higher plants, Journal Plant Physiology,161:1189~1202
Ruellanda E, Zachowskia A.2010. How plants sense temperature. Environmental and Experimental Botany,69:225~232
Scandalios J.1997. Oxidative stress and the molecular biology of antioxidant defenses. Cold SpringHarbor Laboratory Press,11(26):527~568
Shi W M, Muramoto, Uedaa Y A, Takabe T.2001. Cloning of peroxisomal ascorbate peroxidase gene frombarley and enhanced thermo tolerance by over expressing in Arabidop sisthaliana. Gene,273:2~27
Shao H B, Liang Z S, Shao M A, Sun Q.2005. Dynamic changes of anti-oxidative enzymes of10wheatgenotypes at soil water deficits. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces,42:187~195
Shao H B, Liang Z S, Shao M A.2006. Osmotic regulation of10wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes atsoil water deficits. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces,47:132~139
Shao H B, Chu L Y, Jaleel C A, Zhao C X.2008. Water-deficit stress-induced anatomical changes in higherplants. Comptes Rendus Bioloogies,331(3):215~225
Sharp R E, Poroyko V, Hejlek L G, Spollen W G, Springer G K, Bohnert H J, Nguyen H T.2004. Rootgrowth maintenance during water deficits: physiology to functional genomies. Journal of ExperimentBotany,55:2343~2351
Sinsawat V, Leipnr J, Stamp P, Fracheboud Y.2004. Effect of heat stress on the photo synthetic apparatus inmaize (Zea mays L.) grown at control or high temperature. Environmental and Experimental Botany,52:123~129
Souza R P,Machado E C, Silva J A B.2004. Photosynthetic gas exchange, chlorophyll fluorescence andsome associated metabolic changes in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) during water stress and recovery.Environment al and Experiment al Botany,51:45~56
Sung D Y, Guy C L.2003. Physiological and molecular assessment of altered expression of Hsc70-1inArabidop sis. evidence for pleiotropic consequences. Plant Physiology,132:979~987
Tanaka K, Suda Y, Kondo N.1985. Ozone tolerance and the ascorbate dependent hydrogen peroxidedecomposing system in chloroplasts. Plant and Cell Physiology,26:1425~1431
Thumma B R, Naidu B P, Chandra A, Cameron D F, Bahnisch L M.2001. Identification of causalrelationship among traits related to drought resistance in Stylosanthes scabra using QTL analysis.Journal of Experimental Botany,52:203~214
Turkan I, Bor M, Ozdemir F, Koca H.2005. Differential responses of lipid peroxidation and antioxidants inthe leaves of drought tolerant P. acutifolius Gray and drought sensitive P. vulgaris L. subjected to PEGmediated water stress. Plant Science,168:22~3231
Vitale A, Bielli A, Ceriotti A.1995. The binding protein associates with monomeric phaseolin. PlantPhysiology,107:1411~1418
Xu Q, Huang B.2001. Morphysiological and physiological characteristics associated with heat tolerance increeping bentgrass. Crop Science,41:127~133
Wang W, Vinocur B, Shoseyov O, Altman A.2004. Role of plant heat-shock proteins and molecularchaperones in the abiotic stress response.Trends in Plant Science,9:244~252
Wahid A, Gelani S, Ashraf M, Foolad M R.2007. Heat tolerance in plants: An overview. Environmentaland Experimental Botany61:199~223
Zhang J L, Flowers T J, Wang S M.2010. Mechanisms of sodium uptake by roots of higher plant. PlantSoil,326(1):45~60
Zlatev Z S, Lidon F C, Ramalho J C, Yordanov I T.2006. Comparison of resistance to drought of threebean cultivars. Biologia Plantarum,50(3):389~394
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |