PEG Simulated Drought Stress: Effects on Morphological Indices of Drought-tolerant and Drought-sensitive Sugar Beet Germplasms

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0298

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to provide a theoretical basis for the selection of drought-tolerant sugar beet germplasm and the research on sugar beet stress tolerance, the effects of different levels of drought stress on the growth of sugar beet seedlings were discussed. In this study, two drought-tolerant types of BGRC16137 (V₁) and Ian 1 (V₂) and two drought-sensitive types 92011/1-6/1 (V₃) and 7412/823-3 (V₄) were used as materials, and drought was simulated with PEG and the effect of drought stress on sugar beet was studied by significance test of difference and stepwise regression analysis. As the degree of drought stress increased, the aboveground and underground indices of seedlings and the relative leaf water content of the four sugar beet germplasms all showed significant decrease, and the root-shoot ratio gradually increased. Under various concentrations of drought stress, the drought-tolerant V₁ and V₂ germplasms showed lower decrease in leaf fresh weight, leaf dry weight, leaf saturated fresh weight, root length and root fresh weight than the drought-sensitive V₃ and V₄ germplasms. Under severe drought stress, the relative leaf water content of the drought-sensitive V₃ and V₄ germplasms decreased by 37.33% and 43.90%, respectively, compared with that of the control, while the relative leaf water content of the drought-tolerant V₁ and V₂ germplasms only decreased by 14.94% and 20.45%, respectively. The results suggested that the drought-tolerant sugar beet germplasms can adapt to drought stress by increasing leaf fresh weight, leaf dry weight, leaf saturated fresh weight, root length, root fresh weight and the relative leaf water content.

Key words: sugar beet, seedling, drought stress, morphological indices, response mechanisms

CLC Number:

S566.3

SHI Yang, YIN Xilong, LI Wangsheng, XING Wang. PEG Simulated Drought Stress: Effects on Morphological Indices of Drought-tolerant and Drought-sensitive Sugar Beet Germplasms[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(29): 45-51.

Figures/Tables 6

References 29

[1]	纪瑞鹏, 于文颖, 冯锐, 等. 作物对干旱胁迫的响应过程与早期识别技术研究进展[J]. 灾害学, 2019, 34(2):153-160.
[2]	陈润仪, 贺泽霖, 贾也纯, 等. 干旱胁迫对甜菜生长的影响及甜菜抗旱育种研究进展[J]. 中国糖料, 2021, 43(3):54-60.
[3]	YU B, CHEN M, GRIN I, et al. Mechanisms of sugar beet response to biotic and abiotic stresses[J]. Mechanisms of genome protection and repair, 2020,167-194.
[4]	ROMANO A, SORGONA A, LUPINI A, et al. Morpho-physiological responses of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) genotypes to drought stress[J]. Acta physiologiae plantarum, 2013, 35(3):853-865. doi: 10.1007/s11738-012-1129-1 URL
[5]	邹利茹. 不同栽培型甜菜种子萌发与幼苗对干旱胁迫的响应[D]. 哈尔滨: 黑龙江大学, 2021:10-19.
[6]	李志, 薛姣, 耿贵, 等. 逆境胁迫下甜菜生理特性的研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(24):39-47.
[7]	韩凯虹, 张继宗, 王伟婧, 等. 水分胁迫及复水对华北寒旱区甜菜生长及品质的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2015, 34(4):61-66.
[8]	唐利华, 樊华, 李阳阳, 等. 甜菜叶片、根系含水量及根系活力对干旱胁迫的反应[J]. 新疆农垦科技, 2019, 42(1):8-10.
[9]	张净, 王锦霞, 郭萌萌, 等. 甜菜幼苗对干旱胁迫的适应机制[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(32):1-7.
[10]	张立军, 樊金娟, 阮燕晔, 等. 聚乙二醇在植物渗透胁迫生理研究中的应用[J]. 植物生理学通讯, 2004(3):361-364.
[11]	JACKSON W T. Use of carbowaxes (polyethylene glycol) as osmotic agents[J]. Plant physiol, 1962, 39:513-519. doi: 10.1104/pp.39.4.513 URL
[12]	CARPITA N C, SABULARSE D, MONTEZINOS D, et al. Determination of the pore size of cell walls of living plant cells[J]. Science, 1979, 205:1144-1147. pmid: 17735052
[13]	李国龙, 吴海霞, 温丽, 等. 甜菜苗期抗旱鉴定指标筛选及其综合评价[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2011, 29(4):69-74.
[14]	李娜, 罗俊杰, 张仁陟, 等. 持续模拟干旱胁迫对胡麻萌发特性影响及品种抗旱性评价研究[J]. 核农学报, 2016, 30(2):379-387. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2016.02.0379
[15]	史刚荣, 程雪莲, 刘蕾, 等. 扁担木叶片和次生木质部解剖和水分生理特征的可塑性[J]. 应用生态学报, 2006(10):1801-1806.
[16]	随梦飞, 胡康, 吴丽君, 丁国昌, 等. 干旱胁迫对不同耐旱型观赏草幼苗生长及碳氮代谢的影响[J/OL]. 西南林业大学学报:自然科学:1-8[2022-04-08].
[17]	杨阳, 申双和, 马绎皓, 等. 干旱对作物生长的影响机制及抗旱技术的研究进展[J]. 科技通报, 2020, 36(1):8-15.
[18]	张翠梅, 师尚礼, 吴芳. 干旱胁迫对不同抗旱性苜蓿品种根系生长及生理特性影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(5):868-882.
[19]	杨甜, 张永清, 董馥慧, 等. 不同水分条件下不同抗旱性苦荞根系生长规律研究[J]. 作物杂志, 2019(6):76-82.
[20]	高宏云, 李军宏, 王远远, 等. 2个不同耐旱性棉花品种光合特性和干物质累积对干旱的响应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2020, 57(2):233-244. doi: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2020.02.004
[21]	林金莲, 王馥兰, 王承林, 等. 甜菜根系的形成与结构的初步研究[J]. 中国甜菜, 1988(1):9- 15,65-66,2.
[22]	李军宏, 李文静, 王远远, 等. 不同耐旱性棉花品种根系生长及水分利用效率对干旱的响应机制[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(1):20-29. doi: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.01.003
[23]	厉广辉, 万勇善, 刘风珍, 等. 不同抗旱性花生品种根系形态及生理特性[J]. 作物学报, 2014, 40(3):531-541.
[24]	FUKAI S, PANYUWAN G, JONGDEE B, et al. Screening for drought resistance in rainfed lowland rice[J]. Field crops research, 1999, 64(1-2):61-74. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(99)00051-9 URL
[25]	倪洪涛, 杨靖媛, 侯玉刚, 等. 甜菜抗旱性评价体系及抗旱育种研究进展[J]. 中国糖料, 2010(2):6.
[26]	马富举, 李丹丹, 蔡剑, 等. 干旱胁迫对小麦幼苗根系生长和叶片光合作用的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23(3):724-730.
[27]	HSIAO T C. Plant responses to water stress[J]. Annual review of plant physiology, 1973, 24(1):519-570. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pp.24.060173.002511 URL
[28]	安玉艳, 梁宗锁. 植物应对干旱胁迫的阶段性策略[J]. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23(10):2907-2915.
[29]	胡承伟, 张学昆, 邹锡玲, 等. PEG模拟干旱胁迫下甘蓝型油菜的根系特性与抗旱性[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2013, 35(1):48-53.

编号	种质编号	种质名称	种质来源	耐旱类型	编号	种质编号	种质名称	种质来源	耐旱类型
V₁	ZT000727	BGRC16137	美国	耐旱型	V₃	ZT001542	92011/1-6/1	中国	干旱敏感型
V₂	ZT000687	依安一号	中国	耐旱型	V₄	ZT000039	7412/823-3	中国	干旱敏感型

编号	种质编号	种质名称	种质来源	耐旱类型	编号	种质编号	种质名称	种质来源	耐旱类型
V₁	ZT000727	BGRC16137	美国	耐旱型	V₃	ZT001542	92011/1-6/1	中国	干旱敏感型
V₂	ZT000687	依安一号	中国	耐旱型	V₄	ZT000039	7412/823-3	中国	干旱敏感型

指标	种质	PEG-6000浓度/%
指标	种质	0	3	6	9
株高/cm	V₁	14.87 ±1.79 aA	13.83 ±1.89 abA	13.50 ±1.10 abA	11.57 ±0.67 bA
	V₂	13.17 ±1.10 aA	12.80 ±1.51 aA	11.83 ±0.64 abA	10.37 ±0.93 bA
	V₃	14.23 ±2.66 aA	11.73 ±2.14 abA	9.83 ±0.76 bAB	6.17 ±1.05 cB
	V₄	14.57 ±1.17 aA	12.50 ±2.88 aAB	9.23 ±0.64 bBC	6.50 ±0.70 bC
叶鲜重/g	V₁	5.07 ±0.89 aA	3.50 ±0.19 bB	3.07 ±0.31 bBC	2.06 ±0.24 cC
	V₂	3.98 ±0.21 aA	2.76 ±0.37 bB	1.51 ±0.14 cC	1.28 ±0.18 cC
	V₃	3.36 ±0.21 aA	0.60 ±0.08 bB	0.61 ±0.02 bB	0.10 ±0.02 cC
	V₄	3.65 ±0.72 aA	0.79 ±0.07 bB	0.68 ±0.09 bB	0.19 ±0.02 bB
叶干重/g	V₁	0.58 ±0.09 aA	0.31 ±0.05 bAB	0.46 ±0.04 cB	0.33 ±0.03 cB
	V₂	0.33 ±0.07 aA	0.39 ±0.08 abAB	0.23 ±0.01 bcAB	0.17 ±0.03 cB
	V₃	0.31 ±0.07 aA	0.10 ±0.01 bB	0.12 ±0.02 bcB	0.03 ±0.01 cB
	V₄	0.39 ±0.09 aA	0.13 ±0.01 bB	0.15 ±0.03 bB	0.06 ±0.01 bB
叶饱和鲜重/g	V₁	5.81 ±1.37 aA	4.02 ±0.15 bAB	3.54 ±0.33 bcB	2.52 ±0.16 cB
	V₂	4.56 ±0.91 aA	3.19 ±0.66 bAB	1.80 ±0.18 cB	1.76 ±0.14 cB
	V₃	4.38 ±0.09 aA	0.86 ±0.03 bB	0.84 ±0.03 bB	0.17 ±0.03 cC
	V₄	4.34 ±0.54 aA	1.14 ±0.14 bB	1.21 ±0.13 bBC	0.35 ±0.05 cC

指标	种质	PEG-6000浓度/%
指标	种质	0	3	6	9
株高/cm	V₁	14.87 ±1.79 aA	13.83 ±1.89 abA	13.50 ±1.10 abA	11.57 ±0.67 bA
	V₂	13.17 ±1.10 aA	12.80 ±1.51 aA	11.83 ±0.64 abA	10.37 ±0.93 bA
	V₃	14.23 ±2.66 aA	11.73 ±2.14 abA	9.83 ±0.76 bAB	6.17 ±1.05 cB
	V₄	14.57 ±1.17 aA	12.50 ±2.88 aAB	9.23 ±0.64 bBC	6.50 ±0.70 bC
叶鲜重/g	V₁	5.07 ±0.89 aA	3.50 ±0.19 bB	3.07 ±0.31 bBC	2.06 ±0.24 cC
	V₂	3.98 ±0.21 aA	2.76 ±0.37 bB	1.51 ±0.14 cC	1.28 ±0.18 cC
	V₃	3.36 ±0.21 aA	0.60 ±0.08 bB	0.61 ±0.02 bB	0.10 ±0.02 cC
	V₄	3.65 ±0.72 aA	0.79 ±0.07 bB	0.68 ±0.09 bB	0.19 ±0.02 bB
叶干重/g	V₁	0.58 ±0.09 aA	0.31 ±0.05 bAB	0.46 ±0.04 cB	0.33 ±0.03 cB
	V₂	0.33 ±0.07 aA	0.39 ±0.08 abAB	0.23 ±0.01 bcAB	0.17 ±0.03 cB
	V₃	0.31 ±0.07 aA	0.10 ±0.01 bB	0.12 ±0.02 bcB	0.03 ±0.01 cB
	V₄	0.39 ±0.09 aA	0.13 ±0.01 bB	0.15 ±0.03 bB	0.06 ±0.01 bB
叶饱和鲜重/g	V₁	5.81 ±1.37 aA	4.02 ±0.15 bAB	3.54 ±0.33 bcB	2.52 ±0.16 cB
	V₂	4.56 ±0.91 aA	3.19 ±0.66 bAB	1.80 ±0.18 cB	1.76 ±0.14 cB
	V₃	4.38 ±0.09 aA	0.86 ±0.03 bB	0.84 ±0.03 bB	0.17 ±0.03 cC
	V₄	4.34 ±0.54 aA	1.14 ±0.14 bB	1.21 ±0.13 bBC	0.35 ±0.05 cC

指标	种质	PEG-6000浓度/%
指标	种质	0	3	6	9
根长/cm	V₁	27.50 ±1.80 aA	24.33 ±1.15 abAB	22.53 ±2.16 bAB	25.47 ±0.92 bB
	V₂	21.33 ±1.62 aA	26.00 ±2.00 abA	21.93 ±2.90 abA	22.33 ±1.99 bA
	V₃	27.00 ±4.50 aA	20.50 ±4.44 bA	20.67 ±0.58 bA	19.73 ±0.95 bA
	V₄	24.40 ±4.89 aA	19.83 ±0.76 abA	20.77 ±1.57 abA	16.83 ±2.84 bA
根鲜重/g	V₁	1.43 ±0.24 aA	1.09 ±0.13 bAB	1.03 ±0.11 bAB	0.72 ±0.08 cB
	V₂	1.03 ±0.01 aA	1.13 ±0.01 abA	0.93 ±0.02 bA	0.94 ±0.16 bA
	V₃	1.05 ±0.14 aA	0.33 ±0.03 bB	0.35 ±0.07 bB	0.07 ±0.01 cC
	V₄	0.90 ±0.17 aA	0.24 ±0.04 bB	0.25 ±0.01 bB	0.06 ±0.01 cB