Effects of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi (AMF) Species and Inoculating Period on Mycorrhizal Tissue Culture Plantlets of Paeonia suffruticosa

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0628

Abstract

Abstract:

To explore the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) in the application of Paeonia suffruticosa tissue culture and solve the bottleneck problems such as difficult rooting of in vitro plants and low transplantation survival rate etc, we cultivated high-quality mycorrhizal plantlets of P. suffruticosa based on different P. suffruticosa cultivars and hybrids, and selected the best combination of dominant species of AMF, inoculation type and inoculation period. The results showed that: the frequency and intensity of colonization of mycorrhiza inoculated with AMF were the highest among all the treatments after the root length was ≥2.0 cm in vitro. The length and number of mycorrhiza were 49.29% and 46.99% higher than that of the control (without inocultating AMF). As for ‘Z1-10-3’, inocultating the mixture spore of Glomus geosporum+Glomus mosseae (Gg+Gm) had the highest frequency (93.12%) and intensity of colonization (31.23), extremely and significantly higher than that of Gg and Gm (P=0.01); and for ‘Z1-WM’, the mixture spore of (Gg+Gm) had the highest frequency (95.96%) and intensity of colonization (33.33), followed by Gg, then Gm; for ‘Wulongpengsheng’, inocultating Gg had the highest frequency (85.76%) and intensity of colonization (25.80). The inoculation of AMF in vitro could increase the survival rate of transplantation for vitroplants by 45.88 percentage points compared with that of the control. Therefore, with the inoculation of AMF, the mycorrhization of vitroplants of P. suffruticosa could be realized, it could increase the transplanting survival rate and promote the growth of mycorrhizal tissue culture plantlets of P. suffruticosa effectively.

Key words: Paeonia suffruticosa, arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, tissue culture plantlet, mycorrhizal, colonization, transplanting survival rate

CLC Number:

S685.11

Zeng Duanxiang, Yuan Tao, Wang Lianying. Effects of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi (AMF) Species and Inoculating Period on Mycorrhizal Tissue Culture Plantlets of Paeonia suffruticosa[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(30): 53-58.

Figures/Tables 5

References 37

[1]	Smith F. A Summery of Registered and named Intersectional Hybrids[J]. Paeonia, 1995, 25(4):3-5.
[2]	Smith D. Peony Intersectional Crosses- A Brief of the Progress of the first 50 years[J]. Paeonia, 1997, 27(2):5-7.
[3]	Gnekow M A, Marschner H. Role of VA-mycorrhizain growth and mineral nutrition of apple root stock cuttings[J]. Plant and Soil, 1989, 119(2):285-293. doi: 10.1007/BF02370421 URL
[4]	Smith D. Breeding tree peonies for fragrance[J]. Paeonia, 1997, 27(4):1-3.
[5]	Liu R J, Li M, Liu X Z, et al. Effection arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal inoulation and N P K fertilization on improving spoiled soil in brickfield[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 1999, 17(3):45-50.
[6]	刘润进, 李晓林. 丛枝菌根及其应用[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2000:1-186.
[7]	曾端香, 王莲英. 丛枝菌根在园艺植物上的应用研究进展[A].//张启翔.2005中国观赏园艺研究进展[C]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2005: 597-603.
[8]	郭绍霞, 孟祥霞, 王莲英, 等. 牡丹AM菌根菌自然侵染率的调查[J]. 中国农学通报, 2003, 19(3):77-79.
[9]	Budi S W, Cordier C, Trouvelot A, et al. Arbuscular mycorrhiza as a way of promoting sustainable growth of micropropagated plants[J]. Acta Horticulture, 1998, 457:71-77.
[10]	张桂花, 王洪梅, 王连祥. 牡丹组织培养技术研究[J]. 山东农业科学, 2001(5):16-18.
[11]	陈怡平, 廉永善, 王勋陵. 紫斑牡丹休眠地下芽在组织培养条件下的发育研究[J]. 西北植物学报2003, 23(2):314-317.
[12]	曾端香, 尹伟伦, 赵孝庆, 等. 牡丹繁殖技术[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2000, 22(3):90-95.
[13]	Harris R A, Mantell S H. Effect of stage Ⅱ subculture duration on the multiplication rate and rooting capacity of micropropagated shoots of tree peony[J]. Hort Sci, 1991, 66(1):95-102.
[14]	Kunneman B, Albers M. Tissue culture of peony is not yet producing plants[J]. Bloembollencultuur, 1989, 100:16-17.
[15]	曾端香, 袁涛, 王莲英. 两个牡丹杂交系种子胚培养技术研究[J]. 热带农业科学, 2011, 31(3):8-12.
[16]	杨红超, 裴冬丽. 牡丹种子胚培养研究[J]. 广西农业科学, 2006, 37(2):108-110.
[17]	常可可, 杨玉珍, 张志浩, 等. ‘凤丹’牡丹胚培养及褐化防治研究[J]. 西部林业科学, 2019, 48(5):149-152.
[18]	张会, 孙金月, 单雷, 等. 牡丹成熟胚的组织培养[J]. 植物育种, 2018, 16(19):6449-6454.
[19]	Pieriek R L M,. In vitro culture of higher plants as a tool in propagaiton of horticulture crops[J]. Acta Hort, l988, 226:25-40.
[20]	刘文科, 杨其长. 环境控制与丛枝菌根在组培苗生产中的作用[J]. 中国农学通报, 2005, 21(12):60-61.
[21]	Azcon A C, Berea J M. Applying mycorrhiza biotechnology to horticulture: significance and potentials[J]. Sci Horticulture, 1997, 68:1-24.
[22]	王真辉. 菌根真菌在植物组培苗生产技术中的应用[J]. 热带农业科学, 2001(5):71-78.
[23]	Fortuna P, Morini S, Giovannetti M. Effects of Arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi on in vitro-rootinitiation and development of micropropagated plum shoots[J]. Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology, 1998, 73(1):19-28. doi: 10.1080/14620316.1998.11510938 URL
[24]	李敏, 刘鹏起, 刘润进. 丛枝菌根真菌对芋组织培养苗生长的影响[J]. 园艺学报, 2002, 29(5):451-453.
[25]	任萌圃, 李青, 王幼珊, 等. 几种丛枝菌根真菌对金叶连翘组培苗生长的影响[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2004(6):66-70.
[26]	曾端香, 袁涛, 王莲英. AM真菌接种剂与栽培基质对牡丹容器苗丛枝菌根侵染的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2011, 27(10):108-112.
[27]	曾端香, 王莲英. AM真菌对牡丹容器苗矿质元素吸收的影响[A].//王莲英, 袁涛.2013中国洛阳国际牡丹高峰论坛文集[C]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2013:197-201.
[28]	董昌金, 郑世学, 赵斌. 球囊霉属几种AMF孢子表面消毒与萌发的研究[J]. 菌物系统, 2003, 22(3):410-416.
[29]	Phillips J M, Hayman D S. Improved procedures for clearing roots and staining parasitic and vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi for rapid assessment of infection[J]. Trans Brit Mycol Soc, 1970, 55:158-161. doi: 10.1016/S0007-1536(70)80110-3 URL
[30]	Vierheilig, Coughlan. Ink and vinegar, a simple staining technique for arbuscular-mycorrhizal fungi[J]. Appl Environ Microbiol, 1998, 64(12):5004-5007. doi: 10.1128/AEM.64.12.5004-5007.1998 URL
[31]	Abbott L K, Robson A D, de Boer G . The effect of phosphorus on the formation of hyphac in soil the VM fungus Glomus fasciculatum[J]. New Phytol, 1984, 97:437-439. doi: 10.1111/nph.1984.97.issue-3 URL
[32]	Bouza L, Jacques M, Sotta B. Requirements for in vitro rooting of P. suffruticosa cv ‘Mme de Vatry’[J]. Scientia Horticulture, 1994, 58(3):223-233. doi: 10.1016/0304-4238(94)90154-6 URL
[33]	Azcon A C, Berea J M. Applying mycorrhiza biotechnology to horticulture:significance and potentials[J]. Sci Horticulture, 1997, 68:1-24.
[34]	唐豆豆, 李厚华, 张延龙, 等. ‘凤丹’牡丹组织培养研究[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2016, 31(2):160-166.
[35]	刘瑞霞, 姚庆智, 孟和其其格, 等. 蒙古莸组培苗菌根化技术研究[J]. 内蒙古农业大学学报:自然科学版, 2019, 40(6):48-52.
[36]	周玉洁, 洪文君, 黄久香, 等. 瓶内接种菌根真菌对毛棉杜鹃生长与抗性酶的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2017, 30(12):2687-2682.
[37]	韦祖粉, 蒲振蕊, 鲁清清, 等. 油用牡丹凤丹种子休眠解除及组织培养研究[J]. 种子, 2020, 39(1):54-58.

分级	侵染比例
0级	0%
1级	0%<n≤1%
2级	1%<n≤10%
3级	10%<n≤50%
4级	50%<n≤90%
5级	>90%

分级	侵染比例
0级	0%
1级	0%<n≤1%
2级	1%<n≤10%
3级	10%<n≤50%
4级	50%<n≤90%
5级	>90%

编号	时期	处理	侵染率/%	侵染强度	生根率/%	平均根长/cm	平均根数
休眠芽组培苗Ⅰ	未诱导生根阶段	对照	0.00Cc	0.00Cd	10.20Cd	0.21Dd	0.52Dd
休眠芽组培苗Ⅰ	未诱导生根阶段	AMF	2.11Cc	1.32Ccd	16.80Cd	0.24Dd	0.63Dd
休眠芽组培苗Ⅱ	已完成根诱导阶段	对照	0.00Cc	0.00Ccd	55.23Bc	2.25Cc	1.72Dd
休眠芽组培苗Ⅱ	已完成根诱导阶段	AMF	58.00Bb	16.45Bb	73.50Bb	2.85BCb	2.17Bb
休眠芽组培苗Ⅲ	根长2 cm以上	对照	0.00Cc	0.00Cc	100.00Aa	2.82Bb	1.83Cc
休眠芽组培苗Ⅲ	根长2 cm以上	AMF	78.25Aa	23.33Aa	100Aa	4.21Aa	2.69Aa

编号	时期	处理	侵染率/%	侵染强度	生根率/%	平均根长/cm	平均根数
休眠芽组培苗Ⅰ	未诱导生根阶段	对照	0.00Cc	0.00Cd	10.20Cd	0.21Dd	0.52Dd
休眠芽组培苗Ⅰ	未诱导生根阶段	AMF	2.11Cc	1.32Ccd	16.80Cd	0.24Dd	0.63Dd
休眠芽组培苗Ⅱ	已完成根诱导阶段	对照	0.00Cc	0.00Ccd	55.23Bc	2.25Cc	1.72Dd
休眠芽组培苗Ⅱ	已完成根诱导阶段	AMF	58.00Bb	16.45Bb	73.50Bb	2.85BCb	2.17Bb
休眠芽组培苗Ⅲ	根长2 cm以上	对照	0.00Cc	0.00Cc	100.00Aa	2.82Bb	1.83Cc
休眠芽组培苗Ⅲ	根长2 cm以上	AMF	78.25Aa	23.33Aa	100Aa	4.21Aa	2.69Aa

编号	根长	处理	侵染率/%	侵染强度
胚根苗Ⅰ	根长≤0.5 cm	对照	0.00Dd	0.00Ee
胚根苗Ⅰ	根长≤0.5 cm	AMF	35.23Cc	9.21Cc
胚根苗Ⅱ	0.5 cm≤根长≤1.0 cm	对照	0.00Dd	0.00Dd
胚根苗Ⅱ	0.5 cm≤根长≤1.0 cm	AMF	67.20Bb	18.05Bb
胚根苗Ⅲ	根长≥2.0 cm	对照	0.00Dd	0.00Dd
胚根苗Ⅲ	根长≥2.0 cm	AMF	90.25Aa	30.33Aa