Fusarium avenaceum Infection: Effects on Physiological Indexes of Leaves and Roots of Naked Barley with Different Resistance

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb18080016

Abstract

Abstract: In order to determine the effect of Fusarium avenaceum infection on naked barley leaves and roots physiological characteristics, Pro, soluble sugar, soluble protein and MDA contentand were tested in pot culture condition with an inoculation method. The results showed that the content of Pro in diseased leaves of resistant NQK-01-03 were higher than those in healthy ones, while soluble sugar, soluble protein and MDA in diseased leaves were lower than healthy ones. And the content of Pro, soluble protein and MDA in diseased roots of resistant NQK-01-03 were higher than those in healthy ones, while soluble sugar in diseased roots were lower than healthy ones. Meanwhile, the content of Pro and MDA in diseased leaves and roots of susceptible GanQing Ⅱ were higher than those in healthy ones, while soluble sugar and soluble protein in diseased leaves and roots were lower than healthy ones. At the same time, the content of Pro in diseased leaves of susceptible GanQing Ⅱ were higher than those in healthy ones of resistant NQK-01-03, while soluble sugar, soluble protein and MDA in diseased leaves of susceptible GanQing Ⅱ were lower than healthy ones of resistant NQK-01-03. And the content of Pro, MDA in diseased roots of susceptible GanQing Ⅱ were higher than those in healthy ones of resistant NQK-01-03, while soluble sugar and soluble protein in diseased roots of susceptible GanQing Ⅱ were lower than healthy ones of resistant NQK-01-03. There was a negative correlation between the content of Pro and resistance, and a positive correlation was found between soluble protein and resistance. This study provided theoretical basis on physiological mechanism of F. avenaceum infection naked barley leaves and roots.

CLC Number:

S432.45

References

[1]冯西博, 王建林, 钟志明,等. 青藏高原青稞赖氨酸含量空间分布及其与环境因子的关系[J]. 核农学报, 2017, 31(7): 1388-1396.
[2] 李雪萍. 青藏高原青稞根腐类病害及其对根际土壤微生态的影响[D]. 兰州：甘肃农业大学,2017.
[3] Armas R D, Santiago R, Legaz M E, et al. Levels of phenolic compounds and enzyme activity can be used to screen for resistance sugarcane to smut (Ustilago scitaminea)[J]. Australasian Plant Pathology, 2007, 36(1): 32-38.
[4] 刘佳,张匀华,孟庆林,等. 菌核病菌毒素对向日葵叶片生理生化的影响[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2015, 37( 5) : 719-723.
[5]李丹,吐尔迪.吐尼亚孜,王丽丽,等. 棉花抗黄萎病性与叶片保护酶含量和丙二醛含量的关系[J]. 新疆农业大学学报, 2014, 37(2):131-136.
[6]欧秀玲,耿雅文,李凤,等. 棉花黄萎病病原菌诱导侵染对转基因抗病棉花生理性状的影响[J]. 生物技术通讯, 2013, 6:94-98.
[7]赵秀娟,唐鑫,程蛟文,等. 酶含量、丙二醛含量变化与苦瓜抗枯萎病的关系[J]. 华南农业大学学报, 2013, 34(3):372-377.
[8]张笑宇,于肖夏,琚亮亮,等. 黑痣病菌毒素对马铃薯幼苗生理生化抗性相关物质的诱导[J]. 植物保护学报, 2013, 40(1):51-55.
[9] 隋永超,冷暖,姜赫男,等. 乙烯利对干旱胁迫下草地早熟禾生理指标的影响[J]. 草业科学,2018, 35(4): 822-828.
[10] 邹琦．植物生理生化实验指导[M]．北京: 高等教育出版社, l995．
[11]唐启义,冯明光.实用统计分析及其DPS数据处理系统[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2002.
[12] Molinari H B C, Maryr C J, Filho J C B,et al. Osmotic adjustment in transgenic citrus rootstock Carrizo citrange(Citrussinensis Osb. x Poncims trifoliate L.Raf.) overproducing proline[J]. Plant Science, 2004, 167(6): 1375-1381.
[13] Ohto M, Onai K, Furukawa Y, Aoki E, Araki T. Effects of sugar on vegetative development and floral transition in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Physiology, 2001, 127(1): 252- 261.
[14] 周博如,李永镐,刘太国,等．不同抗性的大豆品种接种大豆细菌性疫病菌后可溶性蛋白、总糖含量变化的研究[J]．大豆科学,2000,19(2)：111-114.
[15]吴晓丽,田晓莉,王郁铨,等. 花椰菜幼苗抗黑腐病的生理机制研究[J]. 西北植物学报, 2006, 26(3): 484-489.
[16]李赤,于莉,刘付东标,等. 富贵竹中可溶性糖、蛋白质含量与细菌性茎腐病的关系[J]. 吉林农业大学学报,2007,29( 6) : 620-622.
[17]李伯凌,霍本君,朱寿松,等. 木薯叶片组织结构及生理生化特征与其抗细菌性枯萎病的关系[J]. 热带生物学报,2017,8(3) : 292-300.
[18]杨瑞平,刘长命,莫言玲,等. 两个甜瓜材料对白粉病的抗性差异及其生理生化机制研究[J]. 园艺学报,2016,43(4) : 724-734.
[19]罗玉明,张晓燕,华春. 大麦黄花叶病抗性机理的初步研究[J]. 南京师大学报(自然科学版) ,2000,(4):93-96.
[20]史俊卿,张浩,于红威,等．立枯丝核菌毒素对人参防御酶含量及丙二醛含量的影响[J]．湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版),2010,36(4)：434-436.
[21]樊堂群,迟玉成,谢宏峰,等．不同抗性花生感染网斑病菌的酶含量及丙二醛含量变化[J]．花生学报,2009,38 (4)：31-34.
[22]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含量的影响[J]．植物病理学报,2001,31(2)：152-156.
[23]房保海,张广民,迟长凤,等. 烟草低头黑病菌毒素对烟草丙二醛含量和某些防御酶的动态影响[J]．植物病理学报,2004,34(1)：27-31.