摘要
采用耐旱性地被植物构建城市绿地将会对紧张的城市用水起到一定的缓解作用;筛选出抗旱性强、耗水少的地被植物,对减少养护管理费用、保护生态环境和节约水资源都具有重大意义。
本文选择了具有市场潜力的5种地被植物:大花滨菊(Chrysanthemum maximum)、北京夏菊(Beijing Summer Chrysanthemum)、北京小菊(Beijing miniature chrysanthemum)、八宝景天(Sedum .Spectablile Boreau)和松塔景天(Sedum. Nicaeense All)作为研究对象,在田间控制灌水的条件下,测定了5种地被植物的各项水分指标和生化指标,旨在揭示5种地被植物抗旱生理机制的差异,并综合评价5种地被植物的抗旱性强弱,对其主要抗旱机理进行了比较研究,结果表明:
(1)在干旱胁迫下,5种地被植物的土壤含水量和叶片相对含水量这两个指标都呈下降趋势,其中大花滨菊的相对含水量下降幅度最大,而八宝景天的相对含水量下降幅度最小;同时5种地被植物的水分饱和亏随着土壤含水量的下降呈增大趋势。
(2)在干旱胁迫下,八宝景天的叶片保水力最大,大花滨菊最小;叶片失水率的变化表现为大花滨菊>北京小菊>北京夏菊>松塔景天>八宝景天;随着干旱胁迫的加剧,束缚水比例增大,束缚水/自由水比值增大。5种地被植物相比较,八宝景天和松塔景天的束缚水、束缚水/自由水比值均高于其它3个品种。
(3)随着干旱胁迫程度的加深,5种地被植物的细胞膜透性、脯氨酸含量、可溶性糖含量和丙二醛含量的变化趋势基本相同:八宝景天和松塔景天的丙二醛含量随胁迫干旱处理天数的增加呈上升—降低—上升的趋势,北京小菊、北京夏菊和大花滨菊在整个胁迫期间丙二醛含量一直增加;细胞膜透性增大;渗透调节物质脯氨酸含量和可溶性糖含量也逐渐增加。
(4)结合实物观测,采用主成分、隶属函数等分析方法,对5种地被植物进行的抗旱性综合评价表明:5种地被植物的抗旱能力强弱排列顺序为:八宝景天>松塔景天>北京小菊>北京夏菊>大花滨菊。
Establishing Urben greenland by the plant with drought resistance will relax the lack of water in city. Screening out the plant with enduring drought and expending water smaller is playing an important role in reducing maintain and overhead expenses, protecting entironment and saving water resource.
This paper has chosen five kinds of cover plants which have market potential: Chrysa nthemum maximum, Beijing Summer Chrysanthemum , Beijing miniature chrysanthemum, Sedum .Spectablile Boreau and Sedum. Nicaeense All as experiment materials and under field controlling soil water environments, this paper mainly measure some water indexes and biochemical indexes of five kinds of cover plants in different soil water. We expected to discover difference of drought resistance mechanism and to comprehensive evalue the droughte resistance of five kinds of cover plants. The main results are follow:
(1) Under the stress of drought , the soil moisture and the relative water content of five species was decreased. Of which‘Chrysanthemum maximum’leaves show the greatest relative decline in water content, and‘Sedum .Spectablile Boreau’which relative high water content show small decline in water content. But water saturation deficiencies of five species have a trend of increase with decrease of soil water content .
(2) The leaf water losing rate of S.Speetablile Cav Carmen is maximum,and Chrysanthemum maximum is minimum under the drought stress. The trend of leaf water losing rate shows that Chrysanthemum maximum> Beijing miniature chrysanthemum> Beijing Summer Chrysanthemum> Sedum. Nicaeense All> Sedum .Spectablile Boreau. The confined water proportions and Va/Vs of five species are increasing with the decrease of soil water content. During the water stress the confined water proportions of Sedum. Nicaeense All and S.Speetablile Cav Carmen are heigher than other species.
(3) Under the stress of drought , the study of the five species of the permeability of cell membranes, proline content, Water soluble carbohydrate content and malondialdehyde content show that with the deepening of water stress level, changes in trends in different plants are basically the same: Peroxide content of MDA, the permeability of cell membranes, proline content and Water soluble carbohydrate content are all gradually increase. The content of MDA with‘Sedum .Spectablile Boreau’and’Sedum. Nicaeense All’increased firstly, reached the climax, then decreased. The content of MDA with‘Beijing minichry santhemum’,‘Dendranthema morifoliu ,‘Beijing Summer Chrysanthemum’’and‘Chrysanthemum maximum’enhanced with the deeper of stressed.
(4) Combination of physical observation. By principal components analysis and subordinate function analysis, results show that the drought resistance of the five kinds of cover plants from strongest to the weakest were as follow: Sedum .Spectablile Boreau, Sedum. Nicaeense All, Beijing miniature chrysanthemum, Beijing Summer Chrysanthemum, Chrysanth- emum maximum.
引文
[1]梁新华,徐兆祯,许兴等.小麦抗旱生理研究现状与思考[J].甘肃农业科技, 2001(2): 24-27.
[2]张建国,李吉跃,沈国舫著.树木耐早特性及其机理研究[M].北京:中国林业出版社, 2000.
[3]景蕊莲.作物抗旱研究的现状与思考[J].干旱地区农业研究, 1999, 17(6): 79-85.
[4] .张正斌.作物抗旱节水的生理遗传育种基础[M].北京:科学出版社, 2004.
[5]蒋志荣.沙冬青抗旱机理探讨[J].中国沙漠, 2000, 3: 71-74.
[6] LIUY,DENGLQ. The Drought Resitance of the Main Tree Species in Relation with Their Root Characteristics in the Western Areas of Liaoning Provinee[J]. Journal of ShengyangAgheultural University, 1995, 26(2): 171-176.
[7]杨静慧,杨焕庭.苹果属植物叶片角质层厚度与植物抗旱性[J].天津农学院学报, 1996, 3(3): 27-28.
[8]王万里.植物对水分胁迫的响应[J].植物生理学通迅, 1981, 5: 55-64.
[9]米海莉,许兴,李树华等.水分胁迫下牛心朴子幼苗的抗旱生理反应和适应性调节机理[J].干旱地区农业研究, 2002, 20(4): 11-16.
[10]柴守玺.小麦抗旱生态分类中适合性具类方法的研究[J].应用生态学报, 2000, 11(6): 833~838.
[11] Chandva B R, Pathan M, Blum A, et al. Comparison of measurement methods of osmotic adjustment in rice cultivars[J]. Crop Sci, 1999, 39:150-158.
[12]彭立新,李德全.植物在渗透胁迫下的渗透调节作用[J].天津农业科学, 2002, 8(l):40-43.
[13]周瑞莲,孙国钧,王海鸥.沙生植物渗透调节物对干旱、高温的响应及其在逆境中的作用[J].中国沙漠, 1999, 19(Supp.1): 18~22.
[14]刘崇怀.水分胁迫对葡萄几个生化指标的影响.葡萄酿酒与加工,1991(3):12-17.
[15]陈颖,沈惠娟. 3个南方造林树种幼苗抗旱性的比较.江苏林业科技, 1997, 24(4): 11-14.
[16]李锦树,王洪春,王文英等.干旱对玉米叶片细胞膜透性及膜脂的影响[J].植物生理学报, 1983, 9: 223.
[17]徐世昌.土壤干旱后玉米叶细胞膜脂过氧化和膜磷脂脱酯化反应以及膜超微结构的变化.作物学报[J], 1994, 20(5): 564-569.
[18]唐逆顺等.水分胁迫对玉米幼苗膜脂过氧化及保护酶的影响.河北农业大学学报, 1992, 15(2):34-40.
[19]李广敏等.渗透胁迫对玉米保护酶系统的影响及其与抗旱性的关系[J].河北农业大学学报, 1994, 17(2): 1-5.
[20] MAUREL C. Aquaporins and Water Permeability of Plant Membranes. Annu. Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol, l 997, (48): 399-429.
[21] Peter Schopfer, Claudia Plachy, Gitta Frahry. Release of reactive oxygen produced[J]. J of Exp Bot, 2001, 52(355): 369-373.
[22] Staffan Erling Jjus, Henrik Vibe Scheller, Bertil Andersson, et al. Active oxygen produced during selective excitation of photosystem I is Damaging not only to photosystem I But also to photosystemⅡ[J]. Plant Physio1, 2001, 125: 2007-2015.
[23]陈善福,舒庆尧.植物耐早胁迫的生物学机理及其基因工程研究进展[J].植物学通报, 1999, 16(5): 555-560.
[24]彭立新,李德全,束怀瑞.园艺植物干旱胁迫生理及耐旱机制研究进展[J].西北植物学报, 2002, 22(5): 1275-1281.
[25] Papadakis A K, Roubelakis-angelakis K A. Oxidative stress could be responsible for the recalcitrance of plant protoplasts. Plant physiology and Biochemistry, 2002, 40(68): 549-559.
[26]苏梦云,范铭庆.渗透胁迫和钙处理对杉木幼苗膜脂过氧化及保持酶活性的影响[J].林业科学研究, 2000, 13(4): 391-396.
[27]WE. Hendry GAF. Lee JA. The combined efects desiccation and irradiance on mosses from xeric and hydric habitats[J]. J Exp Bot, 1992, 43: 103-109.
[28]宗会,刘娥娥,郭振飞等.干旱、盐胁迫下LaC13和CP对稻苗脯氨酸积累的影响[J].植物生理学通讯, 2001, 27(2): 173-177.
[29]唐薇,李维江,张冬梅等.干旱对转基因棉苗期叶片POD、MDA和光合速率的影响[J].中国棉花, 2002, 29(2): 23-24.
[30]陈少裕.甘蔗水分胁迫的自由基机制的研究[D].福建农业大学硕士论文, 1990.
[31]陈立松,刘星辉.水分胁迫对荔枝叶片活性氧代谢的影响[J].园艺学报, 1998, 25(3): 241-246.
[32]聂华堂,陈竹生,计玉.水分胁迫下柑桔的生理变化与抗性的关系[J].中国农业科学, 1991, 24(4): 14-18.
[33] Chandler C.K. and Ferree D.C. Response of‘Raritan’and‘Surecrop’Strawberry to drought stresss[J]. Fruit Varieties Journal, 1990, 44(4): 182-185.
[34]姚允聪,王有年,张瑞等.水分亏缺条件下草莓幼苗几个水分生理指标的变化[J].果树科学, 1992, 9(4): 208-212.
[35] Ngugen A, Lamant A. Pinitol and myo-inositoli accumulation in water-stressed seedlings of maritime pine[J]. Phytochemistry, 1998, 27: 3423-3427.
[36] Bruria H, Arie N. Physiological response of plants to soil salinity and water deficits[J]. Plant Science, 1998, 137: 43-51.
[37]Streeter J G, Lohnes D G, Fioritto R J. Patterns of pinitol accumulation in soybean plants and relationships to drought tolerance[J]. Plant cell and environment, 2001, 24: 429-438.
[38]黎裕.作物抗旱鉴定方法与指标.干旱地区农业研究[J], 1993, 11(1): 91-99.
[39]周广生,周竹青,朱旭彤.用隶属函数法评价小麦的耐湿性.麦类作物学报, 2001, 21(4): 34-37.
[40]孙彩霞,沈秀瑛.作物抗旱性鉴定指标及数量分析方法的研究进展.中国农学通报, 2002, 18(1): 49-51.
[41]周连东,张学舜,刘俊恒等.利用隶属函数综合评价玉米杂交种[J].作物杂志, 2004, (5): 18-19.
[42]武涛.园林地被植物抗旱性及应用研究[D].南京林业大学硕士论文, 2002.
[43]周家琪,吴涤新.秦岭南坡火地塘等地区野生花卉和地被植物种植资源调查初报[J].北京林学院学报, 1982, 4(2): 78-92.
[44]程喜梅,梁芳,袁丽洁.河南野生观赏地被植物资源调查[J].安徽农业科学, 2007, 35(31): 10022-10023, 10025.
[45]朱莉,李延成,张敬东.济南地区地被植物及野生地被资源的调查与应用[J].山东林业科技, 2004, (2): 19-22.
[46]朱云华,朱生树. 11种观赏地被植物引种栽培和耐荫性试验[J].金陵科技学院学报(自然科学)2007, 2: 6.
[47]Dikey R D.Seleet Grouud Covers for Foreda Homes Bulletiou[R]. Florida Agriculture ExperimentStations, 1971, 41.
[48] Powell R H. Grounde overs for Australia[J]. Seed and NurseryTrader, 1973, 71: 167-186.
[49] HodeI D R, Pittenger D R. Responses of eight groundcover species to revonation by mowing[J]. Joumal of Environmental Hortieultore, 1994, 12(l):4-7.
[50] Fortgens G, Hoffman-MHA. Thymus, Investigation of the range[J]. Dendroflora, 1992, (29): 19-33.
[51]王雁.北京市主要园林植物耐荫性及其应用的研究[D].北京林业大学, 1996.
[52]张玲慧.地被植物耐荫性研究及园林配置探讨[D].浙江大学, 2004.
[53] Sim Y G. Han Y. Effeet of shadeing treatment an ground covering by native cover plants[J]. J Agro Environ Sci, 1998, 40(2): 118-125.
[54]吴秋花,吴雪梅等.花营蒲等3种莺尾属湿地植物抗旱性研究[J].安徽农业科学, 2007, 35(12): 3481,3492.
[55]胡化广,刘建秀等.结缕草属植物的抗旱性初步评价[J].草业学报, 2007, 16(l): 47-51.
[56]崔妖鹏.地被菊抗旱节水性初步研究[D].北京林业大学, 2005.
[57] Leafe.E.L, Jones MB. The Physiological effects of water stress on perennial ryegrass in the field. Proceedings of the Vlll. International grassland congress, 1977, l: 253~260.
[58] Delaney V.I., Calatayud A, et al. Changes in chloroPhyll fluoreseenee, Photosynthetic CO2 assimilation and xanthoPhylls cycle interconversions during dehydration-tolerant and intolerant liverworts. Planta, 1998, 207: 224-228.
[59] B.K.Barg, S.Kathju. Influence of water stress on water relations, Photosynthetic parameters and nitrogen metabolism of moth bean genetypes[J]. Biologia Plantarum, 2001, 44(2): 289-292.
[60]郑维霞,郝留彦等.几种地被植物在北京园林绿化中的应用研究[J].北方园艺, 2006(5): 138-139.
[61]赵可新,何加等.地被植物在传统景点改造中的地位和作用-以杭州曲院风荷公园为例[J].中国园林, 2006, 11:63-67.
[62]魏涛.公路边坡生态防护工程体系及护坡植物的选择[J].公路交通技术, 2000, 1: 12-15.
[63]何云,李贤伟.浅谈岩石边坡护坡植物选择[J].四川草原, 2006(4): 38-42.
[64]张杰,胡永红.上海地区屋顶绿化植物调查研究[J].生物学杂志, 2006, 23(5): 38-40.
[65] Knorr B. Native perennials around and under our yohododendrons[M]. Immergrune-Blatter, 1997.
[66]辛国荣,董美玲,宋淑明.牧草抗旱性研究—Ⅱ水分胁迫下8种燕麦品种的抗旱性综合评价[J].草业科学.1996, 13(6): 30–34.
[67]陈建勋,王晓峰.植物生理学实验指导[M].广州:华南理工大学出版社, 2002: 2-3.
[68]李合生.植物生理生化实验原理和技术.北京:高等教育出版社, 2004: 6.
[69]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.
[70]付凤玲,李晚枕,潘光堂.模糊隶属法对玉米苗期耐旱性的拟合分析.干旱地区农业研究, 2003, 1: 83-85.
[71]李合生,孙群,赵世杰等.植物生理生化实验原理与技术[M].高等教育出版社, 2004: 134-138; 156-157.
[72]邹琦.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:中国农业出版社, 2000: 195.
[73]Biehler K.Fock H.Evidence for the contribution of the Mehler-peroxidase reaction in dissipating Excess electrons in drought stressed wheat.Plant Physical,1996,112:265-272.
[74]单长卷,郝文芳,梁宗锁,等.不同土壤干旱程度对刺槐幼苗水分生理和生长指标的影响[J].西北农业学报, 2005, 14(2): 44-49.
[75]冯金朝.沙生植物水分特征曲线及水分关系的初步研究[J].中国沙漠, 1995, 15(3): 222-226.
[76]王孟本,李洪建,柴宝峰等.树种蒸腾作用、光合作用和蒸腾效率的比较研究[J].植物生态学报, 1999, 23(5): 401-410.
[77]刘友良.植物水分逆境生理[M].北京:农业出版社, 1992.
[78]何海燕,许国辉,马国强等.青海东部主要造林树种的水分生理研究[J].西北林学院学报. 2003, 18(2): 9-12.
[79]孔照胜,武云帅,岳爱琴等.不同大豆品种抗旱性生理指标综合分析[J].华北农学报, 2001, 16(3): 40-45.
[80] Bowler C,Van Montagu M,lnze D.Superoxide dismutase and stress tolerance[J], Ann RePlant Physiol.Plant Mol Biol., 1992, 43: 83-116.
[81]蔺经,李嘉瑞.杏苗木抗旱性的综合评价[J],北方果树, 1999, 5: 1-3.
[82]蒲锦春.我国荒漠植物的水分饱和亏[J],中国沙漠, 1989, 9(3): 44-53.
[83]傅瑞树,苏铁耐旱、抗寒及光合生理特性研究[J].武夷科学, 2001, 17(1): 44-45.
[84]王育红等.花生抗旱性与生理生态指标关系的研究.杂粮作物, 2002, 22(3): 147-149.
[85]夏新莉,郑彩霞,尹伟伦.土壤干旱对樟子松针叶膜脂过氧化膜脂成分和乙烯释放的影响[J].林业科学, 2000, 36(3): 8-12.
[86]龚明.作物抗旱性鉴定方法与指标及其综合评价.云南大学学报[J], 1989, 1: 73-80.
[87]蔡泽林.割手密抗旱生理研究.甘蔗糖业, 1992, (5).
[88]梁丽琼,谭裕模,张革民.甘蔗叶片束缚水/自由水比与抗旱性关系[J].广西蔗糖. 1997, (03).
[89]曹帮华,巩其亮,段祖安等. 3树种苗木水分状况与造林成活效果的研究[J].山东林业科技, 1998, 2: 7-10.
[90]王洪春.植物生理学专题讲座仁[M].北京:科学出版社, 1987. 336-341.
[91]卢从明,张其德,匡廷云.水分胁迫对光合作用影响的研究进展[J].植物学通讯, 1994, 11(增刊) :9-14.
[92]林金科.水分胁迫对茶树光合作用的影响[J].福建农业大学学报. 1998, 4(27): 423-427.
[93] BouslamaM, Schapaugh Jr WT Stress in soybeans.I.Evalua 2 tion of three screening techniques for heat and drought tolerance.CropSci, 1984, 24: 933-937.
[94]魏良明,贾了然,胡学安等.玉米抗旱生化进展[J].干旱地区农业研究, 1997, 15(4): 66-71.
[95]李锦树,王洪春,王文英等.干旱对玉米叶片细胞膜透性及膜脂的影响[J].植物生理学报, 1983, 9: 223.
[96]吴春芳,贾小明,许晓英.磷营养对侧柏、樟子松、油松抗旱性的影响[J].西北林学院学报, 2005, 20(1): 53-56.
[97] Paul M. Cellular mechanism tolerance of water stress[J]. Hort science, 1984, 15.
[98]蒋明义,荆家海,王韶唐.渗透胁迫对水稻幼苗膜脂过氧化及体内保护系统的影响[J].植物生理学报, 1991, 13(1): 17-21.
[99]韩蕊莲,李丽霞,梁宗锁.干旱胁迫下沙棘叶片细胞膜透性与渗透调节物质研究[J].西北植物学报, 2003, 23(10) :23-27.
[100]王爱国.丙二醛作为脂质过氧化指标的探讨[J].植物生理学通讯, 1986, (2): 55-57.
[101]陈少裕.膜脂过氧化与植物细胞的伤害[J].植物生理学通讯, 1991, 27(2): 84-90.
[102]王建明,张作刚,郭春绒等.枯萎病菌对西瓜不同抗感品种丙二醛含量及某些保护酶活性的影响[J].植物病理学报, 2001, 31(2): 152-156.
[103]贾恢先,赵曼容,马莹.典型盐地植物细胞脂质过氧化伤害与质膜超微结构变化的研究[J].西北植物学报. 1994, 14(6): 1-5.
[104]徐克学.生物数学[M].北京:科学出版社, 1999.
[105]王凌云.模糊隶属函数及其对系统性能的影响[J].武汉城市建设学院学报, 2006(2): 44-48.
[106]吉红,郝志刚.用模糊综合评判法对运动场草坪坪床类型与棍播配方优化组合的评价[J].中国草地, 1994(1): 41-45.
[107]王石青,邱林,等.确定隶属函数的统计分析法[J].华北水利水电学院学报, 2002(3): 68-71.
[108]闫玉春.科尔沁沙地九种灌木苗期水分生理与抗旱性研究[D].硕十学位论文, 2005.
[109]李林锋,刘新田.干旱胁迫对桉树幼苗的生长和某些生理生态特性的影响[J].西北林学院学报, 2003, 19(1):14-17.
[110]温国胜,吉川贤,张国盛等.干旱胁迫条件下臭柏的生长[J].内蒙古农业大学学报, 2004, 25(1): 5-10.
[111]黄颜梅,张健,罗承德.树木抗旱性研究[J].四川农业大学学报, 1997, 15(1): 49-54.
[112]刘建泉.沙拐枣水分生理特征及抗旱分析[J].青海农林科技, 1999, 2: 29-32.
[113]曹帮华,巩其亮,段祖安等. 3树种苗木水分状况与造林成活效果的研究.山东林业科技, 1998, 2: 7-10.
[114]李树华,许兴,米海莉等.水分胁迫对牛心朴子植株生长及渗透调节物质积累的影响[J].西北植物学报, 2003, 23(4): 592-596.
[115]赵黎芳,张金政,张启翔等.水分胁迫下扶芳藤幼苗保护酶活性与渗透调节物质的变化[J].植物研究, 2003, 24(4): 437-442.
[116]冀宪领,盖英萍,牟志美.干旱胁迫对桑树生理生化特性的影响[J].蚕业科学,2004, 30(2): 117-122.
[117]马秀芳,沈秀瑛,杨德光.不同耐旱性玉米品种对干旱的生理生化反应[J].沈阳农业大学学报, 2002, 33(3): 167-170.
[118]朱志梅,杨持.沙漠化过程中植物的变化和适应机理研究概述[J].内蒙古大学学报(自然科学版), 2003, 34(1): 103-114.
[119]王霞.水分胁迫对柽柳植物可溶性物质的影响[J].干旱区研究, 1999, 16(2): 7-11.
[120] Koster K L. Glass or mation and desiccation tolerance inseeds[J]. Plant Physiol, 1991, 96: 302-304.
[121] IngramJ, BartelsD. The molecular basis of dehydration tolerance in plants[J]. Annual Reviewon Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology, 1996, 47: 377-403.
[122]冯玉龙,姜淑梅,番茄对高根温引起的叶片水分胁迫的适应[J].生态学报, 2001, 21(5): 747-750.
[123]谢寅峰,沈惠娟,罗爱珍.南方7个造林树种幼苗抗旱生理指标的比较[J].南京林业大学学报, 1999, 23(4): 13-16.
[124]王玮,邹琦,杨军.水分胁迫条件下抗旱性不同小麦树种芽鞘生长的动态分析[M].植物生理学通讯. 1999, 35(5): 359-362.
[125]徐孟亮,姜孝成,周广治.水稻抗旱性与叶片抗脱水能力、脯氨酸及糖的关系[J].生命科学研究, 1998, 2(2): 113-117.
[126]张木清,余松烈.水分胁迫下蔗叶活性氧代谢的数学分析[J].作物学报, 1996, 22(6): 729-735.