肾形肾形虫干预下甜菜幼苗的光合响应

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-1141

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了探讨原生动物新物种肾形肾形虫(Colpoda reniformis)对甜菜幼苗的光合特征的干预情况以及对甜菜幼苗生长情况的影响。采取液体培养方法，选用中国农业科学院甜菜研究所育种品系701为试材，设置接种与未接种肾形肾形虫两个处理，通过生理指标分析和相关性分析来评价肾形肾形虫干预下甜菜幼苗基础表型特征以及光合特性。与未接种肾形肾形虫的处理相比，接种肾形肾形虫后，甜菜幼苗的表型特征及生物量的积累均有显著促进作用，植株的总株高、叶面积、根长、地上部和地下部干质量分别增加了14.14%、15.49%、20.09%、10.0%和33.3%。另外，接种肾形肾形虫后甜菜叶片的Pn、Gs、叶绿素a、叶绿素b及总叶绿素含量显著高于对照，分别增加了43.91%、40.56%、31.58%、31.82%、31.72%。谷氨酰胺合成酶(GS)活性显著增加23.52%。氮素干物质生产效率和氮素积累量的地上和地下分别增加6.3%、8.8%和5.3%、19.7%。相关性分析表明光合特性的指标、氮效率以及植株的叶面积在甜菜生长过程中发挥重要作用。因此，肾形肾形虫可以干预甜菜幼苗的生长发育，通过增加叶面积、叶绿素含量来提高光合作用进而提高氮效率，最终促进甜菜幼苗的生长及生物量的积累。

关键词: 肾形肾形虫, 甜菜, 光合特征, 形态特性, 生理指标

Abstract:

In order to investigate the intervention of Colpoda reniformis, a new protozoan species, on the photosynthetic characteristics and growth of sugar beet seedlings, we used liquid culture method, took the breeding strain 701 of Sugar Beet Research Institute of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences as the test material, and set up two treatments of inoculated and uninoculated with Colpoda reniformis. Then, we evaluated the basic phenotypic characteristics and photosynthetic characteristics of sugar beet seedlings under Colpoda reniformis intervention by physiological indicators analysis and correlation analysis. Compared with those of the uninoculated treatment of Colpoda reniformis, the phenotypic characteristics and biomass accumulation of sugar beet seedlings under inoculated treatment were significantly promoted by Colpoda reniformis, and the total plant height, leaf area, root length, dry weight of the aboveground and underground parts increased by 14.14%, 15.49%, 20.09%, 10.0% and 33.3%, respectively. In addition, the contents of Pn, Gs, chlorophyll A, chlorophyll B and total chlorophyll in sugar beet leaves significantly increased by 43.91%, 40.56%, 31.58%, 31.82% and 31.72%, respectively, compared with those of the control. The activity of glutamine synthase (GS) significantly increased by 23.52%. Nitrogen dry matter production efficiency and nitrogen accumulation increased by 6.3% and 8.8% in the aboveground parts and 5.3% and 19.7% in the underground parts, respectively. Correlation analysis showed that photosynthetic characteristic indicators, nitrogen efficiency and plant leaf area played an important role in the growth of sugar beet. Therefore, Colpoda reniformis can interfere with the growth and development of sugar beet seedlings, improve photosynthesis and nitrogen efficiency by increasing leaf area and chlorophyll content, and ultimately promote the growth and biomass accumulation of the seedlings.

Key words: Colpoda reniformis, sugar beet, photosynthetic characteristics, morphological characteristics, physiological indicators

崔晶晶, 王丽, 窦骞瑶, 韩卓君, 潘恒艳, 宋柏权, 周建朝, 王秋红. 肾形肾形虫干预下甜菜幼苗的光合响应[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(36): 23-33.

CUI Jingjing, WANG Li, DOU Qianyao, HAN Zhuojun, PAN Hengyan, SONG Baiquan, ZHOU Jianchao, WANG Qiuhong. Photosynthetic Response of Sugar Beet Seedlings Under the Intervention of Colpoda reniformis[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(36): 23-33.

图/表 10

参考文献 54

[1]	张书美. 原生动物运动对土壤磷运移和转化的作用[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2005.
[2]	BAMFORTH S S. Symposium on “Protozoan Ecology”: the role of protozoa in litters and soils[J]. Journal of protozoology, 1985, 32(3):404-409. doi: 10.1111/j.1550-7408.1985.tb04035.x URL
[3]	VEHRAGEN F J M, DUYTS H, LAANBOREK H J. Effeets of garzing by flagellaets on competition for amrnonium between nitrifying and heteorotrophic baeteira in soil columns[J]. Applied and enviornment microbiology, 1993, 59:2099-2106.
[4]	孙焱鑫, 林启美, 赵小蓉. 三种纤毛虫对土壤微生物量和有效氮磷含量的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2003(6):1230-1233.
[5]	KOLLER R, RODRIGUEZ A, ROBIN C, et. al. Protozoa enhance foraging efficiency of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi for mineral nitrogen from organic matter in soil to the benefit of host plants[J]. New phytologist, 2013, 199(1):203-211. doi: 10.1111/nph.12249 pmid: 23534902
[6]	林启美, 刘海明, 赵小蓉, 等. 原生动物在土壤磷运移中的作用及其影响因素[C]. 中国动物学会原生动物学分会第十二次学术讨论会, 2003:2.
[7]	COLE C V, ELLIOTT E T, HUNT H W, et al. Trophic interactions in soils as they affect energy and nutrient dynamics. V. Phosphorus transformations[J]. Microbial ecology, 1977, 4(4):381-387. doi: 10.1007/BF02013281 pmid: 24232229
[8]	RONN R, GAVITO M, LARSEN J, et al. Response of free-living soil protozoa and microorganisms to elevated atmospheric CO₂, and presence of mycorrhiza[J]. Soil biology & biochemistry, 2002, 34(7):923-932. doi: 10.1016/S0038-0717(02)00024-X URL
[9]	RONN R, VESTERGARD M, EKELUND F. Interactions between Bacteria, Protozoa and Nematodes in Soil[J]. Acta protozoologica, 2012, 51(3):223-235.
[10]	LI L J, XIONG Q L, PAN K W, et al. Soil protozoa responses to hawthorn recovery time and dynamics of growing seasons[J]. Biodiversity, 2015, 23(6):793-801.
[11]	王香. 土壤原生动物膨胀肾形虫对氮磷元素的响应机制研究[D]. 哈尔滨: 哈尔滨师范大学, 2020.
[12]	JENTSCHKE G, BONKOWSKI M, GODBOLD D L, et al. Soil protozoa and forest tree growth: non-nutritional effects and interaction with mycorrhizae[J]. Biology and fertility of soils, 1995, 20(4):263-269. doi: 10.1007/BF00336088 URL
[13]	BONKOWSKI M, CHENG W, GRIFFITHS B S, et al. Microbial-faunal interactions in the rhizosphere and effects on plant growth§1paper presented at the 16th world congress of soil science, 20-26 august 1998, montpellier, France[J]. European journal of soil biology, 2000, 36(3):135-147. doi: 10.1016/S1164-5563(00)01059-1 URL
[14]	BONKOWSKI M, BRANDT F. Do soil protozoa enhance plant growth by hormonal effects?[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2002, 34(11):1709-1715. doi: 10.1016/S0038-0717(02)00157-8 URL
[15]	LEE E A, TOLLENAAR M. Physiological basis of successful breeding strategies for maize grain yield[J]. Crop sci, 2007, 47(S3):S-202-S-215. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2007.04.0010IPBS URL
[16]	晏梅静, 春兰, 黄盖群, 等. 丛枝菌根真菌对桑树(Morus alba)地上部分的促进作用[J]. 植物生理学报, 2020, 56(12):2647-2654.
[17]	MATHUR S, SHARMA M P, JAJOO A. Improved photosynthetic efficacy of maize (Zea mays) plants with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) under high temperature stress[J]. Journal of photochemistry and photobiology B: biology, 2018, 180:149-154. doi: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2018.02.002 URL
[18]	程加省, 王志伟, 王志龙, 等. 早秋麦苗期光合作用对生物产量的影响[J]. 农业开发与装备, 2019(1):132-133.
[19]	ANDRALOIC P J, BENCZE S, MADGWICK P J, et al. Photosynthesis and growth in diverse willow genotypes[J]. Journal of experimental botany, 2014, 3(2):69-85.
[20]	MU X, CHEN Y. The physiological response of photosynthesis to nitrogen deficiency[J]. Plant physiology and biochemistry, 2021, 158:76-82. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2020.11.019 pmid: 33296848
[21]	URIBELARREA M, CRAFTS-BRANDNER S J, BELOW F E. Physiological N response of field-grown maize hybrids (Zea mays L.) with divergent yield potential and grain protein concentration[J]. Plant and soil, 2008, 316(1):151. doi: 10.1007/s11104-008-9767-1 URL
[22]	刘晓明, 杨延杰, 李天来. 光强对番茄氮素代谢及相关酶活性的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2008(5):1-5.
[23]	李鸿妹, 石晓勇, 丁雁雁, 等. 光照对东海典型赤潮藻生长及硝酸还原酶活性的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2013, 34(9):3391-3397.
[24]	刘德明, 刘强, 荣湘民, 等. 不同油菜品种光合作用及干物质积累对氮效率的影响[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2010(9):29-31,34.
[25]	郭亚宁, 周建朝. 不同基因型甜菜水氮耦合效应研究进展[C]. 中国作物学会甜菜专业委员会学术会议, 2018:7.
[26]	张翼飞, 张晓旭, 刘洋, 等. 中国甜菜产业发展趋势[J]. 黑龙江农业科学, 2013(8):156-160.
[27]	成艳红. 土壤食细菌线虫影响水稻根系生长的养分和激素作用机制[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2010.
[28]	孙玥. 土壤动物对水曲柳和落叶松人工林细根生物量、形态、生产和周转的影响[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北林业大学, 2010.
[29]	王秋红, 周建朝, 王孝纯, 等. 不同基因型甜菜根际土壤有机氮分布特征研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(5):107-114.
[30]	王学奎, 黄见良. 植物生理生化实验原理和技术(第3版)[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版, 2015:125-133.
[31]	朱永恒, 李克中, 陆林. 根际土壤动物及其对植物生长的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2012, 31(10):2688-2693.
[32]	李春俭, 马玮, 张福锁. 根际对话及其对植物生长的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2008(1):178-183.
[33]	BONKOWSKI M. Protozoa and plant growth: the microbial loop in soil revisited[J]. New phytol, 2004, 162(3):617-631. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01066.x pmid: 33873756
[34]	GUO S, XIONG W, HANG X, et al. Protists as main indicators and determinants of plant performance[J]. Microbiome, 2021, 9(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s40168-021-01025-w pmid: 33743825
[35]	黄京华, 谭钜发, 揭红科, 等. 丛枝菌根真菌对黄花蒿生长及药效成分的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2011, 22(6):1443-1449.
[36]	魏猛, 唐忠厚, 陈晓光, 等. 不同氮素水平对叶菜型甘薯光合作用及生长特性的影响[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2014, 30(1):87-91.
[37]	KREUZER K, ADAMCZYK J, IIJIMA M, et al. Grazing of a common species of soil protozoa (Acanthamoeba castellanii) affects rhizosphere bacterial community composition and root architecture of rice (Oryza sativa L.)[J]. Soil biology and biochemistry, 2006, 38(7):1665-1672. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.11.027 URL
[38]	ZHENG W B, WANG L, WANG X, et al. Dominant protozoan species in rhizosphere soil over growth of Beta vulgaris L. In Northeast China[J]. Bioengineered, 2020, 11(1):229-240. doi: 10.1080/21655979.2020.1729929 URL
[39]	WEIDNER S, LATZE, AGARAS B, et al. Protozoa stimulate the plant beneficial activity of rhizospheric pseudomonads[J]. Plant and soil, 2017, 410(1):509-515. doi: 10.1007/s11104-016-3094-8 URL
[40]	林洪鑫, 袁展汽, 肖运萍, 等. 不同株型木薯品种干物质生产和氮素累积及利用特征比较[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2020, 26(7):1328-1338.
[41]	平晓燕, 周广胜, 孙敬松. 植物光合产物分配及其影响因子研究进展[J]. 植物生态学报, 2010, 34(1):100-111. doi: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.01.013
[42]	张浩, 付伟, 吴子龙, 等. 蚓粪对盐胁迫下小麦幼苗生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2020, 40(11):1357-1363.
[43]	陈景蕊, 潘静. 不同品种葡萄叶片SPAD值与叶绿素含量相关性分析[J]. 北方园艺, 2015(19):42-46.
[44]	左亚男. 蚯蚓粪对草莓植株生长发育的影响及作用机制[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2017.
[45]	孟祥武, 韩忠才, 张胜利, 等. 马铃薯叶片叶绿素动态变化及其与产量的相关性[J]. 东北农业科学, 2021, 46(3):79-81,89.
[46]	刘秀香. 松嫩平原两种生境芦苇叶片光合色素的时空动态[D]. 长春: 东北师范大学, 2013.
[47]	理挪, 王培, EDOU P C A, 等. 不同叶龄杉木叶片形态及光合特性分析[J]. 亚热带农业研究, 2018, 14(3):167-171.
[48]	郭春爱, 刘芳, 许晓明. 叶绿素b缺失与植物的光合作用[J]. 植物生理学通讯, 2006(5):967-973.
[49]	AKIHIRO Y. The N-terminal domain of chlorophyllide a oxygenase confers protein instability in response to chlorophyll B accumulation in Arabidopsis[J]. The plant cell, 2005, 5(17).
[50]	周晓明, 张志勇, 王小纯, 等. 不同氮效率小麦的氮代谢特征及GS酶活性与氮代谢指标的相关性研究[J]. 河南农业科学, 2016, 45(9):15-20,32.
[51]	熊淑萍, 王小纯, 马新明, 等. 氮素形态对冬小麦旗叶GS及其同工酶活性和籽粒蛋白质含量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2011, 31(4):683-688.
[52]	冯万军, 邢国芳, 牛旭龙, 等. 植物谷氨酰胺合成酶研究进展及其应用前景[J]. 生物工程学报, 2015, 31(9):1301-1312.
[53]	OLIVEIRA C I. Overexpression of cytosolic glutamine synthetase. relation to nitrogen, light, and photorespiration[J]. Plant physiology, 2002, 129(3):1170-1180. pmid: 12114571
[54]	孙永健, 孙园园, 严奉君, 等. 氮肥后移对不同氮效率水稻花后碳氮代谢的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2017, 43(3):407-419.

处理	真叶数	地上部高/cm	总植株高/cm	叶片面积/cm²	根长/cm	叶片长宽比/%	叶长叶柄比/%
CK	7.23±0.77	11.95±1.22	34.30±6.60	19.63±4.25	22.35±6.80	2.19±0.25	1.02±0.20
1W	7.50±0.88^ns	12.31±0.99^ns	39.15±7.77^**	22.67±2.97^***	26.84±7.74^**	2.08±0.19^*	1.10±0.26^ns

处理	真叶数	地上部高/cm	总植株高/cm	叶片面积/cm²	根长/cm	叶片长宽比/%	叶长叶柄比/%
CK	7.23±0.77	11.95±1.22	34.30±6.60	19.63±4.25	22.35±6.80	2.19±0.25	1.02±0.20
1W	7.50±0.88^ns	12.31±0.99^ns	39.15±7.77^**	22.67±2.97^***	26.84±7.74^**	2.08±0.19^*	1.10±0.26^ns

	Pn/[μmol/(m²·s)]	Tr/[mmol/(m²·s)]	Gs/[mmol/(m²·s)]	Ci/[mmol/(m²·s)]
CK	13.05±2.47	2.20±0.34	39.89±8.85	118.47±36.19
1W	18.78±2.68***	2.49±0.75^ns	59.44±13.39**	166.52±68.02^ns

	Pn/[μmol/(m²·s)]	Tr/[mmol/(m²·s)]	Gs/[mmol/(m²·s)]	Ci/[mmol/(m²·s)]
CK	13.05±2.47	2.20±0.34	39.89±8.85	118.47±36.19
1W	18.78±2.68***	2.49±0.75^ns	59.44±13.39**	166.52±68.02^ns

	叶绿素a	叶绿素b	总浓度	地上高	根长	总高	叶长	叶宽	叶面积	地上干质量	地下干质量
叶绿素a	1
叶绿素b	.913^**	1
总浓度	.986^**	.968^**	1
地上部高	-0.018	0.250	0.092	1
根长	-0.143	-0.159	-0.153	0.066	1
总植株高	-0.143	-0.113	-0.133	0.233	.986^**	1
叶长	-0.288	-0.117	-0.224	0.597	-0.060	0.042	1
叶宽	0.298	0.266	0.292	-0.222	0.471	0.421	-0.578	1
叶片面积	-0.098	0.088	-0.024	0.546	0.358	0.442	.702^*	0.174	1
地上干质量	0.201	0.245	0.224	0.192	0.528	0.547	-0.451	.719^*	0.100	1
地下干质量	-0.126	-0.102	-0.119	0.486	-0.128	-0.043	.845^**	-0.389	.666^*	-0.452	1
总生物量	0.167	0.219	0.192	0.531	0.494	0.572	0.078	0.530	0.565	.788^**	0.192
根冠比	-0.171	-0.147	-0.165	0.284	-0.379	-0.322	.818^**	-0.617	0.433	-.782^**	.902^**
氮效率	-0.074	-0.016	-0.052	0.389	-0.369	-0.294	0.296	-0.375	0.026	-0.258	0.374
SPAD	0.154	0.208	0.180	0.337	-0.202	-0.139	-0.248	0.172	-0.138	0.235	-0.092
Pn	-0.121	0.034	-0.060	.797^**	0.116	0.248	0.517	-0.134	0.518	0.393	0.436
Tr	0.421	0.441	0.438	0.310	-0.119	-0.064	-0.178	0.340	0.090	0.565	-0.088
Gs1	0.007	0.166	0.073	0.605	-0.160	-0.054	0.396	-0.239	0.275	0.262	0.234
Ci	-0.063	0.085	-0.003	0.323	-0.327	-0.264	0.323	-0.379	0.060	-0.068	0.108
NR	0.009	0.153	0.068	0.600	-0.062	0.041	0.168	-0.151	0.083	-0.135	0.286
GS	-0.011	-0.155	-0.070	-0.605	0.058	-0.046	-0.174	0.146	-0.093	0.132	-0.293
	总生物量	根冠比	氮效率	SPAD	Pn	Tr	Gs1	Ci	NR	GS
叶绿素a
叶绿素b
总浓度
地上部高
根长
总植株高
叶长
叶宽
叶片面积
地上干质量
地下干质量
总生物量	1
根冠比	-0.238	1
氮效率	-0.047	0.359	1
SPAD	0.185	-0.166	0.617	1
Pn	.719^*	0.131	0.409	0.227	1
Tr	0.578	-0.271	-0.191	0.387	0.384	1
Gs1	0.434	0.056	0.601	0.309	.865^**	0.281	1
Ci	-0.021	0.112	.755^*	0.316	0.524	-0.091	.857^**	1
NR	0.032	0.265	0.491	0.576	0.131	-0.077	-0.007	-0.010	1
GS	-0.040	-0.268	-0.493	-0.577	-0.137	0.073	0.003	0.009	-1.000^**	1