Rice Germination and Seedling Growth: Responses to the Regulation of Exogenous Substances

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0449

Abstract

Abstract:

To clarify the morphological indexes of rice seeds during germination stage, including simple vigor index, radicle and seedling height, and their response to exogenous NaCl, IAA and CaCl₂, salt-sensitive and salt-tolerant rice varieties were used as materials in this study. The germination dish method was adopted, and data were analyzed by single factor LSD multiple comparison. The results showed that under the stress of 0.1 mol/L NaCl, the simple vigor index, number of radicles, radicle length and plant height of 4 materials were lower than those of CK by 21.9%-76.5%, 20.0%-40.9%, 14.6%-55.9%, and 23.9%-36.2%, respectively. All of these indexes showed significant differences. Under salt stress, adding IAA could increase the simple vigor index of the two salt-sensitive materials by 2.6% and 13.3%, while adding CaCl₂ could increase the simple vigor index of salt-sensitive materials by 9.6%-24.8%. The radicle length and plant height of salt sensitive materials were increased by 7.1%-49.0% and 14.7%-20.9%. With the CaCl2+ IAA compound treatment, the simple vigor index, number of radicles and plant height were increased by 6.9%-94.6%, 2.1%-21.2% and 9.9%-20.3%, respectively. In conclusion, the response of rice germination and seedling growth to exogenous substances is related to genotype and morphological indexes. Under salt stress, the response degree of the three indexes to exogenous CaCl₂ is higher than that to IAA treatment. Furthermore, CaCl₂+IAA compound treatment could effectively offset the inhibition of salt injury on rice growth.

Key words: exogenous substance, rice, simple vigor index, radicle, seedling height

CLC Number:

S511

WANG Jingdong, HUI Jian, BAI Haibo, MA Sishuang, LI Shuhua. Rice Germination and Seedling Growth: Responses to the Regulation of Exogenous Substances[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(29): 1-7.

Figures/Tables 4

References 35

[1]	汪宗立, 刘晓忠, 王志霞. 水稻耐盐性的生理研究:I.盐逆境下水稻品种间水分和渗透调节的差异[J]. 江苏农业学报, 1986, 2(3):1-10.
[2]	李毅民. 水稻耐盐碱特性鉴定方法综述[J]. 国外农学—水稻, 1987(3):8-11.
[3]	GUO W M. Modified Screening Method for Rice Salt Tolerance[J]. IRRN, 1988, 13(5):19.
[4]	翟凤林. 植物的耐盐性及其改良[M]. 北京: 农业出版社,1989.
[5]	李红梅, 金素荣. 盐碱对水稻生产的危害及防治措施[J]. 垦殖与稻作, 2003(5):35-36.
[6]	张建锋. 植物耐盐机理与耐盐植物选育研究进展[J]. 世界林业研究, 2003, 16(2):16-21.
[7]	赵可夫, 王韶唐. 作物抗性生理[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1990:304.
[8]	何学利. IAA与NaCl对玉米种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2011, 17(11):48-50.
[9]	AL-HKIMI A M A, HAMADA A M. Counteraction of salinity stress on wheat plants by grain soaking in ascorbic acid, thiamin or sodium salicylate[J]. Biol. Plant, 2001, 44:253-261. doi: 10.1023/A:1010255526903 URL
[10]	XUE Z, ZHI D, XUE G, et al. Enhanced salt tolerance of transgenic wheat expressing a vacuolar Na⁺ /H⁺ antiporter gene with improved grain yields in saline soils in the fioed a reduced level of leaf Na +[J]. Plant sci, 2004, 167:849-859. doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2004.05.034 URL
[11]	霍书新, 杜国强, 张小红. 钙缓解植物盐害的作用机制研究进展[J]. 土壤肥料, 2005(6):3-6.
[12]	徐芬芬, 叶利民, 王海勤, 等. CaCl₂浸种对水稻幼苗抗盐性的影响[J]. 河南农业科学, 2009(12):44-45,47.
[13]	刘丽云, 王明友. CaCl₂对盐胁迫下小麦种子萌发及生理效应的影响[J]. 河南农业科学, 2010(1):5-7.
[14]	I BONILLA1, A El-HAMDAOUI1, L. Bolaños. Boronandcalci-um increase Pisumsativum seed germination and seed-ling development under salt stress[J]. Plant soil, 2004, 267:97-107. doi: 10.1007/s11104-005-4689-7 URL
[15]	GENC Y, TESTER M, MCDONALD G K. Calcium requirement of wheat in saline and non- saline conditions[J]. Plant soil, 2010, 327:331-345. doi: 10.1007/s11104-009-0057-3 URL
[16]	安福全, 于龙凤. 外源Ca²⁺对盐胁迫下的玉米幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 农业科技通讯, 2012(6):16-18.
[17]	李小玲, 华智锐. 外源Ca²⁺对盐胁黄芩种子的萌发及生理特性影响[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2016, 44(11):145-148.
[18]	秦舒浩, 王东, 汪慧君, 等. 外源Ca²⁺对NaCl胁迫下西葫芦生长特征及光合、生理特性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2013, 27(3):199-203.
[19]	周贺芳. 外源Ca²⁺对盐胁迫下甜瓜果实品质的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2009, 37(1):72-73.
[20]	薛延丰, 刘兆普. 钙离子对盐胁迫下菊芋幼苗的生长、生理反应和光合能力的影响理论[J]. 农业工程学报, 2006, 22(9):44-47.
[21]	朱伟, 房卫平, 谢德意, 等. CaCl₂对盐胁迫下棉花幼苗生长和生理特性的影响[J]. 河南农业科学, 2014, 43(6):35-38.
[22]	祁栋灵, 韩龙植, 张三元. 水稻耐盐/碱性鉴定评价方法[J]. 植物遗传资源学报, 2005, 6(2):226-230.
[23]	蔡蕾, 丁同楼, 王宝山. 外源GA₃、ABA和Ca(NO₃)₂缓解盐对小麦种子萌发的抑制作用[J]. 西北植物学报, 2004, 24(3):583-587.
[24]	李姝晋, 朱建清, 叶小英, 等. 俄罗斯优质水稻种质资源耐盐性鉴定和耐盐指标的评价[J]. 四川大学学报(自然科学版), 2005, 42(4):848-851.
[25]	DENG Y, YUAN F, FENG Z, et al. Comparative study on seed germination characteristics of two species of Australia saltbush under salt stress[J]. Acta ecologica sinica, 2014, 34(6):337-341. doi: 10.1016/j.chnaes.2013.07.011 URL
[26]	HAMAMOTO S, Horie T, Hauser F, et al. HKT transporters mediate salt stress resistance in plants: from structure and function to the field[J]. Current opinion in biotechnology, 2015, 32:113-120. doi: S0958-1669(14)00213-4 pmid: 25528276
[27]	刘亚栋, 张长峰. SA浸种对盐胁迫下小麦种子萌发和幼苗生长的影响[J]. 生命科学研究, 2017, 23(3):244-250.
[28]	阮松林, 薛庆中, 王清华. 种子引发对杂交水稻幼苗耐盐性的生理效应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2003, 36(4):463-468.
[29]	阮松林, 薛庆中. 盐胁迫条件下杂交水稻种子发芽特性和幼苗耐盐生理基础[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2002, 16(3):281-284.
[30]	刘少华, 王仁雷, 刘青, 等. NaCl预处理对高盐胁迫下两系杂交稻幼苗生长的影响[J]. 河南农业大学学报, 2013, 47(2):128-131,137.
[31]	王忠. 植物生理学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[32]	魏爱丽, 陈云昭. IAA对盐胁迫下大豆幼苗膜伤害及抗盐力的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2000, 20(3):410-414.
[33]	WEI A, CHEN Y. Effect of IAA on soybean seedling’s membrance in jury and salt resistance[J]. Acta bot boreal occident sin, 2000, 20(3):410-414.
[34]	何学利. IAA与NaCl对玉米种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2011, 17(11):48-50.
[35]	刘拴成, 曹兴明, 穆俊祥. 外源激素对盐胁迫下番茄种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 种子, 2016, 35(12):94-98

处理	宁粳43号			D15号
处理	发芽率/%	平均鲜重/g	SVI	发芽率/%	平均鲜重/g	SVI
CK	71.333b	0.025b	0.018b±0.002	74.000ab	0.025b	0.019b±0.004
NT	38.000d	0.012d	0.004c±0.001	69.000b	0.017c	0.011c±0.002
NCT	71.333b	0.028b	0.020b±0.003	74.000ab	0.028b	0.021b±0.002
NT1	61.000c	0.017cd	0.010c±0.002	78.667a	0.022bc	0.017b±0.002
NT2	84.667a	0.022bc	0.019b±0.004	74.667ab	0.029b	0.021b±0.004
NCT1	70.000b	0.039a	0.028a±0.005	83.000a	0.041a	0.034a±0.002
NCT2	79.000a	0.040a	0.032a±0.003	79.000a	0.047a	0.037a±0.003
处理	宁粳56号			富源4号
处理	发芽率/%	平均鲜重/g	SVI	发芽率/%	平均鲜重/g	SVI
CK	95.000a	0.035abc	0.034abc±0.006	96.000a	0.029b	0.028b±0.005
NT	93.000a	0.024d	0.022d±0.003	96.333a	0.022c	0.022c±0.003
NCT	96.667a	0.039ab	0.038ab±0.011	97.667a	0.036a	0.035a±0.002
NT1	92.667a	0.027cd	0.025cd±0.004	96.000a	0.029b	0.027b±0.003
NT2	94.667a	0.029bcd	0.027bcd±0.001	96.333a	0.029b	0.028b±0.003
NCT1	97.000	0.037abc	0.036ab±0.001	97.000a	0.039a	0.038a±0.003
NCT2	93.000a	0.044a	0.041a±0.005	96.667a	0.040a	0.039a±0.002

处理	宁粳43号			D15号
处理	发芽率/%	平均鲜重/g	SVI	发芽率/%	平均鲜重/g	SVI
CK	71.333b	0.025b	0.018b±0.002	74.000ab	0.025b	0.019b±0.004
NT	38.000d	0.012d	0.004c±0.001	69.000b	0.017c	0.011c±0.002
NCT	71.333b	0.028b	0.020b±0.003	74.000ab	0.028b	0.021b±0.002
NT1	61.000c	0.017cd	0.010c±0.002	78.667a	0.022bc	0.017b±0.002
NT2	84.667a	0.022bc	0.019b±0.004	74.667ab	0.029b	0.021b±0.004
NCT1	70.000b	0.039a	0.028a±0.005	83.000a	0.041a	0.034a±0.002
NCT2	79.000a	0.040a	0.032a±0.003	79.000a	0.047a	0.037a±0.003
处理	宁粳56号			富源4号
处理	发芽率/%	平均鲜重/g	SVI	发芽率/%	平均鲜重/g	SVI
CK	95.000a	0.035abc	0.034abc±0.006	96.000a	0.029b	0.028b±0.005
NT	93.000a	0.024d	0.022d±0.003	96.333a	0.022c	0.022c±0.003
NCT	96.667a	0.039ab	0.038ab±0.011	97.667a	0.036a	0.035a±0.002
NT1	92.667a	0.027cd	0.025cd±0.004	96.000a	0.029b	0.027b±0.003
NT2	94.667a	0.029bcd	0.027bcd±0.001	96.333a	0.029b	0.028b±0.003
NCT1	97.000	0.037abc	0.036ab±0.001	97.000a	0.039a	0.038a±0.003
NCT2	93.000a	0.044a	0.041a±0.005	96.667a	0.040a	0.039a±0.002