细菌性疫病对菜豆光合特性和生理指标的影响

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0032

中国农学通报 ›› 2024, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (4): 132-139.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0032

细菌性疫病对菜豆光合特性和生理指标的影响

李学庆(), 冯国军, 刘大军, 刘畅, 闫志山, 杨晓旭()

黑龙江大学现代农业与生态环境学院，哈尔滨 150081

收稿日期:2023-01-10 修回日期:2023-07-18 出版日期:2024-02-05 发布日期:2024-01-29
通讯作者:
杨晓旭，男，1988 年出生，吉林松原人，副研究员，博士，研究方向：蔬菜遗传育种与生物技术。通信地址：150006 黑龙江大学现代农业与生态环境学院农学楼331，E-mail：sunny19880106@126.com。
作者简介:
李学庆，女，1999年出生，安徽肥东人，硕士，研究方向：寒区作物种质资源创新及利用。通信地址：150080 黑龙江省哈尔滨市南岗区学府路74号，E-mail：2931614189@qq.com。
基金资助:
黑龙江省自然科学基金“菜豆金黄色基因pv-ye克隆与功能鉴定”(2020-KYYWF-1027); 黑龙江省重点研发计划项目专项课题计划“主要蔬菜作物分子辅助育种决策与新品系培育研究”(SC2022ZX02C0202)

Effect of Bacterial Blight on Photosynthetic Characteristics and Physiological Indicators of Common Bean

LI Xueqing(), FENG Guojun, LIU Dajun, LIU Chang, YAN Zhishan, YANG Xiaoxu()

College of Modern Agriculture and Ecological Environment, Heilongjiang University, Harbin 150081

Received:2023-01-10 Revised:2023-07-18 Published-:2024-02-05 Online:2024-01-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为研究菜豆侵染细菌性疫病后的一系列生理变化，以不同菜豆细菌性疫病抗性品种‘双丰3号’（SF，抗病品种）和‘猫眼’（MY，感病品种）为试验材料，测定接种后不同时段菜豆细菌性疫病对光合作用参数、光合色素含量、POD、SOD活性及超氧阴离子含量积累的影响。结果显示：（1）不同抗性品种间，除胞间CO₂浓度增加外，2个品种的净光合速率、气孔导度、气孔限制值和水分利用效率均呈现下降状态，且增幅和降幅表现为MY>SF。（2）菜豆细菌性疫病侵染导致2个品种的叶绿素a、叶绿素b、总叶绿素和类胡萝卜素含量均有所下降，且总体含量表现为SF>MY。说明SF的光合作用和光合色素含量受菜豆细菌性疫病胁迫的影响小于MY。（3）MY的POD活性总体高出SF 3倍，SOD活性表现为SF>MY，且在超氧阴离子含量积累方面，SF的释放量比MY早2 d变少，其防御机制出现时间早于MY。说明维持较高的光合性能是对菜豆细菌性疫病具有较强抗性的生理基础，且POD和SOD活性都可以作为菜豆细菌性疫病的抗性鉴定生理指标。

关键词: 菜豆, 细菌性疫病, 光合色素, 光合特性, 生理生化指标

Abstract:

In order to study a series of physiological changes in common bean after infestation with bacterial blight, different bean bacterial blight resistant varieties, ‘Shuangfeng No.3’ (SF, resistant variety) and ‘Cat's Eye’ (MY, susceptible variety) were used as test materials to determine the effects of common bean bacterial blight on photosynthetic parameters, photosynthetic pigment content, POD, SOD activity and superoxide anion content-accumulation at different times after inoculation. The results showed that: (1) among different resistant varieties, the net photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, stomatal limitation value and water use efficiency of the two varieties showed a downward trend, except for the increase of intercellular CO₂ concentration, and the increase and decrease showed MY>SF. (2) Chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, total chlorophyll and carotenoid contents of the two varieties decreased due to bacterial blight infestation of common beans, and the overall contents showed SF>MY. This indicated that the photosynthesis and photosynthetic pigment contents of SF were less affected by bacterial blight stress of common beans than MY. (3) The overall POD activity of MY was 3 times higher than that of SF, and the SOD activity showed SF>MY. In terms of superoxide anion content-accumulation, the release of SF decreased 2 d earlier than that of MY, and its defense mechanism appeared earlier than MY. It indicated that maintaining high photosynthetic performance was the physiological basis for strong resistance to the bacterial blight of common bean, and both POD and SOD activities can be used as physiological indicators for the identification of resistance to the bacterial blight of common bean.

Key words: common bean, bacterial blight, photosynthetic pigments, photosynthetic properties, physiological and biochemical indicators

李学庆, 冯国军, 刘大军, 刘畅, 闫志山, 杨晓旭. 细菌性疫病对菜豆光合特性和生理指标的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(4): 132-139.

LI Xueqing, FENG Guojun, LIU Dajun, LIU Chang, YAN Zhishan, YANG Xiaoxu. Effect of Bacterial Blight on Photosynthetic Characteristics and Physiological Indicators of Common Bean[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(4): 132-139.

图/表 8

参考文献 44

[1]	BROUGHTON W J, HERNANDEZ G, BLAIR M W, et al. Beans (Phaseolus spp.) - model food legumes[J]. Plant soil, 2003, 252:55-128. doi: 10.1023/A:1024146710611 URL
[2]	冯佰利, 鱼欢, 高小丽, 等. 中国芸豆品牌发展战略研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2005, 21(6):454-457.
[3]	徐新新. 菜豆普通细菌性疫病菌病原学研究及抗病种质资源鉴定[D]. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2012.
[4]	MIKLAS P N, COYNE D P, GRAFTON K F, et al. A major QTL for common bacterial blight resistance derives from the common bean great northern landrace cultivar Montana No.5[J]. Euphytica, 2003, 131(1): 137-146. doi: 10.1023/A:1023064814531 URL
[5]	MAHUKU G S, JARA C, HENRIQUEZ M A, et al. Genotypic characterization of the common bean bacterial blight pathogens, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli and Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli var. fuscans by rep-PCR and PCR-RFLP of the ribosomal genes[J]. Journal of phytopathology, 2006, 154(1): 35-44. doi: 10.1111/jph.2006.154.issue-1 URL
[6]	AKHAVAN A, BAHAR M, SAEEDI G H, et al. Factors affecting epiphytic population of Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli in Epidemiology of bean common blight[J]. Journal of science & technology of agriculture & natural resources, 2009. 32(4):528-536.
[7]	JACQUES M A, JOSI K, DARRASSE A, et al. Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli var. fuscans is aggregated in stable biofilm population sizes in the phyllosphere of field-grown beans[J]. Applied and environmental microbiology, 2005, 71(4):2008-2015. doi: 10.1128/AEM.71.4.2008-2015.2005 URL
[8]	MARQUEZ, MARGARITA, LEMA, et al. Selecting common bean with genes of different evolutionary origins for resistance to Xanthomonas campestris pv. phaseoli[J]. Crop science, 2007, 47(4):1367-1374. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2006.12.0769 URL
[9]	LEAKEY C. A note on Xanthomonas blight of beans (Phaseolus vulgaris (L.) Savi) and prospects for its control by breeding for tolerance[J]. Euphytica, 1973, 22(1): 132-140. doi: 10.1007/BF00021565 URL
[10]	BASTIAANS L. Ratio between virtual and visual lesion size as a measure to describe reduction in leaf photosynthesis of rice due to leaf blast[J]. Phytopathology, 1991, 81(6):611-615. doi: 10.1094/Phyto-81-611 URL
[11]	BASSANEZI R B, AMORIM L, FILHO A B, et al. Gas exchange and emission of chlorophyll fluorescence during the monocycle of rust, angular leaf spot and anthracnose on bean leaves as a function of their trophic characteristics[J]. Journal of phytopathology, 2010, 150(1):37-47. doi: 10.1046/j.1439-0434.2002.00714.x URL
[12]	ARASE S, FUKUYAMA R, HONDA Y. Light-dependent induction of sekiguchi lesion formation by Bipolaris oryzae in rice cv. Sekiguchi-asahi[J]. Journal of phytopathology, 2010, 148(4):193-196. doi: 10.1046/j.1439-0434.2000.00497.x URL
[13]	RESENDE R S, RODRIGUES F Á, CAVATTE P C, et al. Leaf gas exchange and oxidative stress in sorghum plants supplied with silicon and infected by Colletotrichum sublineolum[J]. Phytopathology, 2012, 102(9): 892-898. doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-01-12-0014-R URL
[14]	FUNAYAMA S, YAHARA H T. Effects of virus infection and growth irradiance on fitness components and photosynthetic properties of Eupatorium makinoi (Compositae)[J]. American journal of botany, 1997, 84(6): 823-829. doi: 10.2307/2445818 URL
[15]	王春梅, 施定基, 朱水芳, 等. 黄瓜花叶病毒对烟草叶片和叶绿体光合活性的影响[J]. 植物学报, 2000(4):388-392.
[16]	SCHOLES J D, ROLFE S A. Chlorophyll fluorescence imaging as tool for understanding the impact of fungal diseases on plant performance: A phenomics perspective[J]. Functional plant biology, 2009, 36(11): 880-892. doi: 10.1071/FP09145 pmid: 32688699
[17]	TOTTERDELL S, ROBERTS E H. Ontogenetic variation in response to temperature change in the control of seed dormancy of Rumex obtusifolius L. and Rumex crispus L.[J]. Plant, cell & environment, 1981, 4(1):75-80.
[18]	PREVORSEK D C, DEBONA B T, KESTEN Y. Synthesis of poly (ester carbonate) copolymers[J]. Journal of polymer science part A polymer chemistry, 2010, 18(1):75-90.
[19]	张希鹤, 李岩, 郁凯, 等. 黄萎病胁迫影响棉花幼苗光合及叶绿素荧光特性的机理[J]. 棉花学报, 2018, 30(2):136-144. doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.zxhcbl.20180313
[20]	郭晋云, 胡晓峰, 李勇, 等. 黄瓜枯萎病对黄瓜光合和水分生理特性的影响[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2011, 34(1):79-83.
[21]	杨志晓, 丁燕芳, 张小全, 等. 赤星病胁迫对不同抗性烟草品种光合作用和叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2015, 35(12):4146-4154.
[22]	TODOROVIĆ B, MILIJAŠEVIĆ S, REKANOVIĆ E. Susceptibility of bean genotypes to Xanthomonas campestris pv. phaseoli in greenhouse conditions[J]. Pesticidi i fitomedicina, 2008, 23(3):197-173.
[23]	徐克章. 盐胁迫对不同水稻品种光合特性和生理生化特性的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2013, 27(3):280-286.
[24]	ARNON D I. Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts: Polyphenoloxidase in Beta vulgaris[J]. Plant physiology, 1949, 24(1):1-15. doi: 10.1104/pp.24.1.1 URL
[25]	RAO M V, PALIYATH G, ORMROD D P. UV-B and ozoneinduced biochemical changes in antioxidant enzymes in Arabidopsis thaliana[J]. Plant physiology, 1996, 110(1):125-136. doi: 10.1104/pp.110.1.125 URL
[26]	CONSTANTINE N, GIANNOPOLITIS, RIES S K. Superoxide dismutases, 2: Purification and quantitative relationship with water-soluble protein in seedlings[J]. Plant physiology, 1977, 59(2):315-318. doi: 10.1104/pp.59.2.315 URL
[27]	江天然, 张立新, 毕玉蓉, 等. 水分胁迫对梭梭叶片气体交换特征的影响[J]. 兰州大学学报, 2001, 37(6):57-62.
[28]	许大全. 光合作用气孔限制分析中的一些问题[J]. 植物生理学报, 1997, 33(4):241-244.
[29]	山仑, 邓西平, 康绍忠. 我国半干旱地区农业用水现状及发展方向[J]. 水利学报, 2002, 33(9):27-31.
[30]	徐俊增, 彭世, 丁加丽, 等. 控制灌溉的水稻气孔限制值变化规律试验研究[J]. 水利学报, 2006, 37(4):486-491.
[31]	贺军民, 佘小平, 刘成, 等. 增强UV-B辐射和NaCl复合胁迫下绿豆光合作用的气孔和非气孔限制[J]. 植物生理与分子生物学学报, 2004, 30(1):53-58.
[32]	薛忠财, 高辉远, 柳洁. 野生大豆和栽培大豆光合机构对NaCl胁迫的不同响应[J]. 生态学报, 2011, 31(11):3101-3109.
[33]	OGLE K, REYNOLDS J F. Desert dogma revisited: Coupling of stomatal conductance and photosynthesis in the desert shrub, Larrea tridentata[J]. Plant cell & environment, 2010, 25(7): 909-921.
[34]	郭海军, 董志强, 林永增, 等. 黄萎病对棉花叶片SOD、POD酶活性和光合特性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 1995(6):40-45.
[35]	SUI N. Photoinhibition of Suaeda salsa to chilling stress is related to energy dissipation and water-water cycle[J]. Photosynthetica, 2014, 53(2):207-212. doi: 10.1007/s11099-015-0080-y URL
[36]	李燕宏, 洪健, 谢礼, 等. 蚕豆萎蔫病毒2号分离物侵染对蚕豆叶片光合活性和叶绿体超微结构的影响[J]. 植物生理与分子生物学学报, 2006, 32(4):490-496.
[37]	郭兴启, 李向东, 朱汉城, 等. 马铃薯Y病毒(PVY)的侵染对烟草叶片光合作用的影响[J]. 植物病理学报, 2000, 30(1):94-95.
[38]	SAKAKI T, KONDO N, SUGAHARA K. Breakdown of photosynthetic pigments and lipids in spinach leaves with ozone fumigation: Role of active oxygens[J]. Physiologia plantarum, 2010, 59(1): 28-34. doi: 10.1111/ppl.1983.59.issue-1 URL
[39]	董汉松. 植物诱导抗病性原理和研究[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1995:160-170.
[40]	张宁, 毕研飞, 郭静, 等. 不同抗性甜瓜接种蔓枯病菌后PAL、PPO与POD活性的变化[J]. 植物生理学报, 2016, 52(8):1169-1175.
[41]	王雅平, 刘伊强. 小麦对赤霉病抗性不同品种的SOD活性[J]. 植物生理学报, 1993, 19(4):353-358.
[42]	SILVA L C, DEBONA D, AUCIQUE-PEREZ C E, et al. Physiological and antioxidant insights into common bean resistance to common bacterial blight[J]. Physiological and molecular plant pathology, 2020, 111:101505. doi: 10.1016/j.pmpp.2020.101505 URL
[43]	李国婧. 超氧阴离子的产生及其在植物体内作用的研究[J]. 生物技术世界, 2012(4):24-25.
[44]	任迎虹, 刘松青, 祁伟亮, 等. 干旱胁迫下桑树叶片中超氧阴离子的变化规律[J]. 广西植物, 2017, 37(9):1122-1129.

光合特性	处理时间/d	双丰3号		猫眼
光合特性	处理时间/d	接种	对照	接种	对照
净光合速率Pn/[μmol/(m²·s)]	1	5.50±2.84a	0.11±2.28a	2.18±2.90a	0.30±3.25a
	3	-12.54±2.21a	-8.59±1.52a	-26.36±0.87b	-0.73±0.08a
	5	1.19±0.22b	2.17±0.15a	0.79±0.13a	0.22±1.77a
	7	1.22±0.02a	1.32±0.12a	1.25±0.14a	1.35±0.13a
蒸腾速率Tr/[mol/(m²·s)]	1	0.56±0.09a	0.21±0.01b	0.61±0.07a	0.44±0.10a
	3	0.21±0.02a	0.13±0.03a	0.15±0.01a	0.10±0.01a
	5	0.25±0.05a	0.22±0.02a	0.20±0.08a	0.25±0.05a
	7	0.31±0.01a	0.24±0.03a	0.22±0.05a	0.24±0.07a
气孔导度Gs/[mmol/(m²·s)]	1	43.43±18.26a	9.88±0.68b	36.00±22.70a	23.05±4.89b
	3	14.58±1.77a	7.04±1.98b	9.11±2.18a	4.99±0.72a
	5	23.13±5.05a	15.71±2.32a	15.57±6.18a	17.02±5.33a
	7	26.10±0.63a	13.78±1.83b	17.92±1.74a	15.22±4.79a
胞间CO₂浓度Ci/(μmol/mol)	1	204.77±14.92b	370.41±19.33a	295.32±2.68b	372.57±1.40a
	3	3269.66±32.00b	9340.27±26.62a	5672.08±13.36a	3585.78±19.55b
	5	1454.43±12.47a	1334.92±14.38b	1131.98±23.20b	1648.71±16.24a
	7	1049.30±19.53b	1247.92±27.37a	906.67±1.82b	931.71±4.75a
气孔限制值Ls/[mmol/(m²·s)]	1	0.44±0.03a	-0.12±0.03b	0.13±0.01a	-0.08±0.04b
	3	-7.94±0.21a	-27.33±0.65b	-4.18±0.51a	-9.44±0.31b
	5	-0.06±0.05b	0.14±0.06a	-0.03±0.09a	-0.11±0.06a
	7	0.31±0.00a	0.24±0.03a	0.27±0.03b	0.46±0.00a
水分利用效率WUE/(μmol/mmol)	1	9.36±3.37a	0.98±10.91a	3.09±4.09a	-0.84±7.42a
	3	-60.66±14.81a	-67.02±8.02a	-174.94±11.13b	-7.77±1.84a
	5	4.72±0.17b	10.05±1.67a	4.56±1.71a	2.17±6.58a
	7	3.97±0.17b	5.49±0.27a	6.16±2.10a	5.94±1.35a

光合特性	处理时间/d	双丰3号		猫眼
光合特性	处理时间/d	接种	对照	接种	对照
净光合速率Pn/[μmol/(m²·s)]	1	5.50±2.84a	0.11±2.28a	2.18±2.90a	0.30±3.25a
	3	-12.54±2.21a	-8.59±1.52a	-26.36±0.87b	-0.73±0.08a
	5	1.19±0.22b	2.17±0.15a	0.79±0.13a	0.22±1.77a
	7	1.22±0.02a	1.32±0.12a	1.25±0.14a	1.35±0.13a
蒸腾速率Tr/[mol/(m²·s)]	1	0.56±0.09a	0.21±0.01b	0.61±0.07a	0.44±0.10a
	3	0.21±0.02a	0.13±0.03a	0.15±0.01a	0.10±0.01a
	5	0.25±0.05a	0.22±0.02a	0.20±0.08a	0.25±0.05a
	7	0.31±0.01a	0.24±0.03a	0.22±0.05a	0.24±0.07a
气孔导度Gs/[mmol/(m²·s)]	1	43.43±18.26a	9.88±0.68b	36.00±22.70a	23.05±4.89b
	3	14.58±1.77a	7.04±1.98b	9.11±2.18a	4.99±0.72a
	5	23.13±5.05a	15.71±2.32a	15.57±6.18a	17.02±5.33a
	7	26.10±0.63a	13.78±1.83b	17.92±1.74a	15.22±4.79a
胞间CO₂浓度Ci/(μmol/mol)	1	204.77±14.92b	370.41±19.33a	295.32±2.68b	372.57±1.40a
	3	3269.66±32.00b	9340.27±26.62a	5672.08±13.36a	3585.78±19.55b
	5	1454.43±12.47a	1334.92±14.38b	1131.98±23.20b	1648.71±16.24a
	7	1049.30±19.53b	1247.92±27.37a	906.67±1.82b	931.71±4.75a
气孔限制值Ls/[mmol/(m²·s)]	1	0.44±0.03a	-0.12±0.03b	0.13±0.01a	-0.08±0.04b
	3	-7.94±0.21a	-27.33±0.65b	-4.18±0.51a	-9.44±0.31b
	5	-0.06±0.05b	0.14±0.06a	-0.03±0.09a	-0.11±0.06a
	7	0.31±0.00a	0.24±0.03a	0.27±0.03b	0.46±0.00a
水分利用效率WUE/(μmol/mmol)	1	9.36±3.37a	0.98±10.91a	3.09±4.09a	-0.84±7.42a
	3	-60.66±14.81a	-67.02±8.02a	-174.94±11.13b	-7.77±1.84a
	5	4.72±0.17b	10.05±1.67a	4.56±1.71a	2.17±6.58a
	7	3.97±0.17b	5.49±0.27a	6.16±2.10a	5.94±1.35a

光合色素	接种时间	双丰3号		猫眼
光合色素	接种时间	接种	对照	接种	对照
叶绿素a	1 d	6.69±0.19a	3.04±1.0b	6.18±1.89a	6.25±1.44a
	3 d	6.58±1.36a	8.10±1.78a	5.19±2.05a	7.88±1.02a
	5 d	8.47±1.29a	7.88±1.71a	6.17±0.58b	8.59±0.99a
	7 d	7.09±0.36b	11.38±1.33a	4.61±1.90a	7.98±1.09a
叶绿素b	1 d	4.15±0.57a	2.03±0.43b	3.41±0.98a	3.58±0.44a
	3 d	4.76±0.65a	4.41±0.51a	3.47±0.75a	5.12±1.16a
	5 d	5.98±1.05a	5.15±1.02a	3.68±0.58b	5.63±0.85a
	7 d	3.65±0.13b	5.45±0.60a	2.96±0.69a	4.34±0.90a
总叶绿素	1 d	2.13±0.38a	1.07±0.20b	1.68±0.48a	1.79±0.15a
	3 d	2.57±0.35a	2.15±0.16a	1.83±0.32a	2.67±0.72a
	5 d	3.20±0.61a	2.70±0.52a	1.86±0.34a	2.95±0.49a
	7 d	1.75±0.05b	2.51±0.27a	1.54±0.28a	2.12±0.50a
类胡萝卜素	1 d	0.21±0.18a	0.07±0.16a	0.49±0.26a	0.27±0.18a
	3 d	0.09±0.24a	0.52±0.26a	0.11±0.39a	0.26±0.24a
	5 d	0.25±0.24a	0.30±0.11a	0.40±0.09a	0.27±0.11a
	7 d	0.74±0.05b	1.31±0.11a	0.25±0.01b	0.68±0.11a

光合色素	接种时间	双丰3号		猫眼
光合色素	接种时间	接种	对照	接种	对照
叶绿素a	1 d	6.69±0.19a	3.04±1.0b	6.18±1.89a	6.25±1.44a
	3 d	6.58±1.36a	8.10±1.78a	5.19±2.05a	7.88±1.02a
	5 d	8.47±1.29a	7.88±1.71a	6.17±0.58b	8.59±0.99a
	7 d	7.09±0.36b	11.38±1.33a	4.61±1.90a	7.98±1.09a
叶绿素b	1 d	4.15±0.57a	2.03±0.43b	3.41±0.98a	3.58±0.44a
	3 d	4.76±0.65a	4.41±0.51a	3.47±0.75a	5.12±1.16a
	5 d	5.98±1.05a	5.15±1.02a	3.68±0.58b	5.63±0.85a
	7 d	3.65±0.13b	5.45±0.60a	2.96±0.69a	4.34±0.90a
总叶绿素	1 d	2.13±0.38a	1.07±0.20b	1.68±0.48a	1.79±0.15a
	3 d	2.57±0.35a	2.15±0.16a	1.83±0.32a	2.67±0.72a
	5 d	3.20±0.61a	2.70±0.52a	1.86±0.34a	2.95±0.49a
	7 d	1.75±0.05b	2.51±0.27a	1.54±0.28a	2.12±0.50a
类胡萝卜素	1 d	0.21±0.18a	0.07±0.16a	0.49±0.26a	0.27±0.18a
	3 d	0.09±0.24a	0.52±0.26a	0.11±0.39a	0.26±0.24a
	5 d	0.25±0.24a	0.30±0.11a	0.40±0.09a	0.27±0.11a
	7 d	0.74±0.05b	1.31±0.11a	0.25±0.01b	0.68±0.11a

细菌性疫病对菜豆光合特性和生理指标的影响

Effect of Bacterial Blight on Photosynthetic Characteristics and Physiological Indicators of Common Bean

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 44

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

关于本刊

作者中心

审者中心

在线期刊

联系我们

[1]	董丽娟, 孙阳阳, 张继亮, 张春香. 6个猕猴桃品种的光合特性分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(4): 61-66.
[2]	肖黄巧, 周红灿, 揭雨成. 不同植物生长调节剂对茶叶低温胁迫的光合特性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(2): 25-33.
[3]	孟战赢, 蔡海峡, 杨浩哲, 王跃卿, 郭党, 李丽峰. 豫西地区青贮玉米光合和产量方面品种适应性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(5): 28-32.
[4]	马晓华, 张旭乐, 章彦君, 胡青荻, 钱仁卷, 郑坚, 汤真勇. 遮阴对紫叶紫薇幼苗生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(35): 61-70.
[5]	屈洋, 马雯, 王可珍, 朱发, 张华锋, 杨浩, 梁福琴. 播种方式和施肥量对大豆光合特性、产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(27): 17-23.
[6]	郭晓霞, 田露, 菅彩媛, 黄春燕, 李智, 张鹏, 韩康, 梁亚晖, 孔德娟, 苏文斌. 化肥减施下生物有机肥对连作甜菜光合特性、干物质积累转运和产量形成的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(22): 1-10.
[7]	屈洋, 马雯, 王可珍, 高小丽, 冯佰利. 种植密度、微肥和复合肥对高粱产量、品质及光合特性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(21): 12-18.
[8]	李鹏飞, 张晓伟, 余小芬, 徐天养, 邱学礼, 殷红慧, 邹炳礼, 杨树明. 文山喀斯特烟区红壤上施硼对烤烟产质量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(21): 33-38.
[9]	赵冀, 聂碧华, 方爱国, 籍立杰, 张瑞玖, 李双东, 王莉红, 马恢. 北方一作区晚熟品种马铃薯同化特性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(15): 30-38.
[10]	胡竞渝, 冯国军, 刘大军, 杨晓旭, 闫志山, 刘畅. 外源腐胺对盐胁迫下菜豆种子萌发及抗性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(15): 52-58.
[11]	代绿叶, 张鑫, 滕英姿, 顾益银, 陈丽, 孔小平, 韩莹琰. LED光照强度对紫叶生菜幼苗的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(10): 24-30.
[12]	陈亮, 栾倩倩, 蔺毅, 张自强. 基质栽培模式对温室西瓜生长、产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(10): 38-44.
[13]	高萌, 张冬野, 冯国军, 杨晓旭, 刘畅, 闫志山, 刘大军. 外源硒对⁶⁰Co-γ辐射下菜豆幼苗生长和生理的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(7): 35-40.
[14]	胡艺璇, 田胜尼, 方超, 胡卫明, 奚晓宇, 吕梦冉. 不同追肥类型对大棚内外紫薯光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(6): 31-36.
[15]	罗志明, 覃伟, 尹炯, 李银煳, 张荣跃, 李俊. 甘蔗种质对甘蔗蓟马的耐害性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(34): 107-112.