Effect of Glomus mosseae on Yield of Two Maize Cultivars and Correlation Analysis of Growth Traits

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb20190400039

Abstract

Abstract:

The aim is to discuss the utilization potentiality of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in maize production, and the relative effect mechanism. ‘Zhengdan 958’ and ‘5999’ were used as field experimental materials, and Glomus mosseae was inoculated by mixing with seeds at sowing stage. The concentration of nitrogen and phosphorus in grains, yield, 100-kernel weight, ear length, ear diameter, row number per ear and kernel number per row were measured by traditional methods at the physiological maturity stage of maize. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to analyze the correlation between the indexes. The yield of ‘Zhengdan 958’ inoculated with G. mosseae was 1.10 times that of the corresponding control, but the G. mosseae had negative effect on yield of ‘5999’. Meanwhile, 100-kernel weight of ‘Zhengdan 958’ was significantly higher than that of ‘5999’ regardless of inoculation or not, and the phosphorus concentration in grains of the two maize varieties was significantly increased by G. mosseae. For ‘Zhengdan 958’, 100-kernel weight was positively correlated with phosphorus concentration in grains, and the correlation coefficient between them increased from 0.6267 to 0.9480 after inoculation with G. mosseae. However, 100-kernel weight of ‘5999’ was negatively correlated with the phosphorus concentration in grains, and positively correlated with the nitrogen concentration in grains, and the improvement by G. mosseae on the nitrogen concentration in grains was not significant. Under field conditions, the yield of ‘Zhengdan 958’ could be enhanced to some extent by inoculating with G. mosseae, which is attributed to the correlation coefficient increase between 100-kernel weight and phosphorus concentration in grains of maize.

Key words: Glomus mosseae, ‘Zhengdan 958’, ‘5999’, yield, correlation

CLC Number:

S182

Ma Xuemiao, Liu Xiao, Xie Xinyu, Wang Yan, Zhang Zhi, Lu Yuncai, Wang Changxian. Effect of Glomus mosseae on Yield of Two Maize Cultivars and Correlation Analysis of Growth Traits[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(19): 8-12.

Figures/Tables 3

References 29

[1]	Smith S E, Read D J. Mycorrhizal Symbiosis(The 3rd edition)[M]. London: Academic Press, 2008.
[2]	Miransari M. Contribution of arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis to plant growth under different types of soil stress[J]. Plant Biology, 2010,12:563-569. URL pmid: 20636898
[3]	Miransari M, Bahrami H A, Rejali F, et al. Effects of soil compaction and arbuscular mycorrhiza on corn (Zea mays L.) nutrient uptake[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2009,103(2):282-290. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2008.10.015 URL
[4]	王琦琪, 陈印军. 我国玉米种植优势分析[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2018,20(3):1-9.
[5]	张淑彬, 王幼珊, 殷晓芳, 等. 不同施磷水平下AM真菌发育及其对玉米氮磷吸收的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017,23(3):649-657.
[6]	石宁, 丛枝菌根真菌种间及与解磷细菌间的生物互作促进玉米磷吸收的机制[D]. 北京:中国农业大学, 2016.
[7]	陆文龙, 郑鹤龄, 潘洁, 等. 非灭菌条件下VA菌根真菌促进玉米吸收磷、氮营养的效应[J]. 华北农学报, 1994(4):94-97. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-7091.1994.04.018 URL
[8]	宋勇春, 李晓林, 冯固. 泡囊丛枝(VA)菌根对玉米根际磷酸酶活性的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2001(4):593-596.
[9]	刘润进, 唐明, 陈应龙. 菌根真菌与植物抗逆性研究进展[J]. 菌物研究, 2017,15(1):70-88.
[10]	孙吉庆, 刘润进, 李敏. 丛枝菌根真菌提高植物抗逆性的效应及其机制研究进展[J]. 植物生理学报, 2012,48(9):845-852.
[11]	姚青. 植物对VA菌根的依赖性差异及菌根活化难溶性磷酸盐的机理研究[D]. 北京:中国农业大学, 2000.
[12]	黄京华, 刘青, 李晓辉, 等. 丛枝菌根真菌诱导玉米根系形态变化及其机理[J]. 玉米科学, 2013,21(3):131-135,139.
[13]	姜德锋, 蒋家慧, 李敏, 等. AM菌对玉米某些生理特性和籽粒产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 1998(1):16-21.
[14]	Novais C B, Borges W L, Jesus E D, et al. Inter- and intraspecific functional variability of tropical arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi isolates colonizing corn plants[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2014,76:78-86. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2013.12.010 URL
[15]	Shin Deguchi, Sunao Uozumi, Eiko Touno, et al. White clover living mulch reduces the need for phosphorus fertilizer application to corn[J]. European Journal of Agronomy, 2017,86:87-92. doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2017.03.006 URL
[16]	朱先灿, 宋凤斌, 徐洪文. 低温胁迫下丛枝菌根真菌对玉米光合特性的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2010,21(2):470-475.
[17]	Franco A D, Carrillo M A, Chairez F O, et al. Plant nutrition and fruit quality of pepper associated with arbuscular mycorrhizal in greenhouse[J]. Revista mexicana de ciencias agrícolas, 2013,4:315-321. doi: 10.29312/remexca.v4i2.1251 URL
[18]	Douds D D, Wilson D O, Seidel R, et al. A method to minimize the time needed for formation of mycorrhizas in sweet corn seedlings for outplanting using AM fungus inoculum produced on-farm[J]. Scientia Horticulturae, 2016,203:62-68. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2016.03.015 URL
[19]	Phillips J M, Hayman D S, Improved procedures for clearing roots and staining parasitic and vesicular arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi for rapid assessment of infection[J]. Transactions of British Mycological Society, 1970,55:158-161. doi: 10.1016/S0007-1536(70)80110-3 URL
[20]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析(第三版)[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2011.
[21]	江龙, 李竹玫, 黄建国, 等. AM真菌对烟苗生长及某些生理指标的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2008(1):156-161. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2008.0125 URL
[22]	徐敏, 史庆华, 李敏. AM真菌对姜生长和产量的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2002,4:22-23.
[23]	夏婷婷. AM真菌生物肥料在提高甜玉米产量中的应用研究[D]. 金华:浙江师范大学, 2017.
[24]	姜德锋, 蒋家慧. AM菌对夏玉米生长和产量的影响[J]. 莱阳农学院学报, 1996(2):37-38.
[25]	Gerdemann J W. Vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizae[A]. Torrey J G, Clarkson D T. The Development and Function of Roots[C]. London,UK: Academic Press, 1975: 575-591.
[26]	Rosendahl S, McGee P, Morton J. Lack of global population genetic differentiation in the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus mosseae suggests a recent range expansion which may have coincided with the spread of agriculture[J]. Molecular Ecology, 2009,18(20):4316-4329. URL pmid: 19765226
[27]	陈笑莹. 低温胁迫下丛枝菌根真菌对玉米碳氮代谢的影响[D]. 长春:中国科学院东北地理与农业生态研究所, 2014.
[28]	李腾腾, 傅智峰, 李侠. 低磷土壤接种菌根真菌和解磷细菌对大田玉米生长和磷吸收的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2017,48(4):922-929.
[29]	Smith S E, Smith F A. Fresh perspectives on the roles of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in plant nutrition and growth[J]. Mycologia, 2012,104(1):1-13. doi: 10.3852/11-229 URL pmid: 21933929

玉米品种	AM真菌	产量/(kg/hm²)	百粒重/g	全氮含量/%	全磷含量/%
郑单958	+	10474.67±630.54^a	41.84±0.12^a	1.87±0.02	0.27±0.01^a
郑单958	-	9528±256.66^ab	40.55±0.20^a	1.38±0.29	0.16±0.02^b
5999	+	7682.67±70.55^ab	35.18±0.39^b	1.99±0.03	0.28±0.04^a
5999	-	8765.33±952.46^b	34.00±1.98^b	1.96±0.08	0.12±0.02^b
方差分析		P值
玉米品种		0.0163	0.0002	0.0526	0.5657
AM真菌		0.9105	0.2591	0.1263	0.0007
玉米品种×AM真菌		0.1218	0.9606	0.1709	0.4853

玉米品种	AM真菌	产量/(kg/hm²)	百粒重/g	全氮含量/%	全磷含量/%
郑单958	+	10474.67±630.54^a	41.84±0.12^a	1.87±0.02	0.27±0.01^a
郑单958	-	9528±256.66^ab	40.55±0.20^a	1.38±0.29	0.16±0.02^b
5999	+	7682.67±70.55^ab	35.18±0.39^b	1.99±0.03	0.28±0.04^a
5999	-	8765.33±952.46^b	34.00±1.98^b	1.96±0.08	0.12±0.02^b
方差分析		P值
玉米品种		0.0163	0.0002	0.0526	0.5657
AM真菌		0.9105	0.2591	0.1263	0.0007
玉米品种×AM真菌		0.1218	0.9606	0.1709	0.4853

性状	产量	百粒重	穗粗	行粒数	穗行数	穗长	全氮	全磷
产量	1	0.8029	0.9230	-0.8035	-0.9917	-0.0615	-0.8664	0.5714
百粒重	-0.0801	1	0.5116	-0.2902	-0.8727	-0.6444	-0.3979	0.9480
穗粗	-0.5610	0.8701	1	-0.9707	-0.8660	0.3273	-0.9918	0.2115
行粒数	-0.6765	0.7882	0.9892	1	0.7206	-0.5447	0.9934	0.0294
穗行数	0.9660	-0.3350	-0.7559	-0.8439	1	0.1890	0.7952	-0.6719
穗长	-0.7856	0.6797	0.9592	-0.9188	-0.9188	1	-0.4451	-0.8543
全氮	-0.7412	-0.6098	-0.1399	0.0070	-0.5425	0.1669	1	-0.0852
全磷	0.7288	0.6267	0.1611	0.0145	0.5243	-0.1456	-0.9998^*	1

性状	产量	百粒重	穗粗	行粒数	穗行数	穗长	全氮	全磷
产量	1	0.8029	0.9230	-0.8035	-0.9917	-0.0615	-0.8664	0.5714
百粒重	-0.0801	1	0.5116	-0.2902	-0.8727	-0.6444	-0.3979	0.9480
穗粗	-0.5610	0.8701	1	-0.9707	-0.8660	0.3273	-0.9918	0.2115
行粒数	-0.6765	0.7882	0.9892	1	0.7206	-0.5447	0.9934	0.0294
穗行数	0.9660	-0.3350	-0.7559	-0.8439	1	0.1890	0.7952	-0.6719
穗长	-0.7856	0.6797	0.9592	-0.9188	-0.9188	1	-0.4451	-0.8543
全氮	-0.7412	-0.6098	-0.1399	0.0070	-0.5425	0.1669	1	-0.0852
全磷	0.7288	0.6267	0.1611	0.0145	0.5243	-0.1456	-0.9998^*	1

性状	产量	百粒重	穗粗	行粒数	穗行数	穗长	全氮	全磷
产量	1	0.7750	0.9449	-0.5000	0.0000	-0.7857	0.9554	-0.9859
百粒重	0.2054	1	0.5254	-0.9348	0.6320	-0.2180	0.9270	-0.8698
穗粗	-0.9112	0.2160	1	-0.1890	-0.3273	-0.9449	0.8062	-0.8769
行粒数	-0.9998^*	-0.2249	0.9028	1	-0.8660	-0.1429	-0.7333	0.6378
穗行数	-0.6187	-0.8959	0.2402	0.6343	1	0.6186	0.2952	-0.1672
穗长	-0.9806	-0.0096	0.9743	0.9765	0.4528	1	-0.5681	0.6712
全氮	-0.2897	-0.9962	-0.1303	0.3087	0.9312	0.0965	1	-0.9914
全磷	-0.8447	-0.6973	0.5492	0.8552	0.9431	0.7234	0.7570	1