Effects of Drought Stress on Physiological Characteristics of Seedlings of Six Kinds of Elaeagnus moorcroftii

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0615

Abstract

Abstract:

In this paper, the physiological responses of different varieties to drought stress were compared and analyzed, and the varieties with strong drought resistance were selected, providing scientific basis for the promotion and planting of fine varieties in arid areas. In this study, the one-year-old cuttings of 6 excellent varieties of Elaeagnus moorcroftii were taken as the research materials, through the soil rehydration treatment after continuous drought, the differences of water physiology and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics of 6 excellent varieties of E. moorcroftii seedlings were compared by one-way ANOVA, and the membership function was comprehensively evaluated. The results showed that the relative water content of leaves (RWC), shoot water potential (PW), maximum photochemical efficiency (Fv/Fm), actual light conversion efficiency [Y(Ⅱ)] and photosynthetic electron transfer rate (ETR) of 6 excellent varieties of E. moorcroftii decreased gradually with the extension of drought duration, and all indexes increased gradually after rehydration. Leaf water saturation deficit (RWD) and initial fluorescence (F₀) increased gradually with the extension of drought stress time, and decreased after rehydration. The drought-resistant ability of the seedlings from strong to weak was ‘Jinsha’> ‘Bachu No.1’> ‘Yafeng’> ‘Cele Rhubarb’> ‘Baisha Tian’> ‘Maigeti No.3’. From July to August, when the temperature is high and the seedling growth is strong, the irrigation cycle of each variety is suggested to be ‘Maigeti 3’ and ‘Baishatian’ for 15 d, ‘Bachu 1’, ‘Yafeng’ and ‘Cele Rhubarb’ for 20 d, and ‘Jinsha’ for 25 d.

Key words: Elaeagnus moorcroftii, natural drought, rehydration, leaf water physiology, chlorophyll fluorescence, drought resistance evaluation

WANG Dan, LUO Qinghong, ZHANG Ping, LU Penghao, WANG Baoqing. Effects of Drought Stress on Physiological Characteristics of Seedlings of Six Kinds of Elaeagnus moorcroftii[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(19): 52-58.

Figures/Tables 8

References 31

[1]	户连荣, 郎南军, 郑科, 等. 植物抗旱性研究进展及发展趋势[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2008(7):2652-2654.
[2]	BRAY E A. Molecular responses to water deficit[J]. Plant physiology, 1993, 103(4):1035-1040. pmid: 12231998
[3]	罗志成. 北方旱地农业研究的进展与思考[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 1994, 12(1):4-13.
[4]	KRAMER J P. Water deficits and plant growth in water[M]. New York: Relations of Plant Academic Press, 1983:342-389.
[5]	陈有民. 园林树木学[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 1990:583-586.
[6]	陈志发. 浅谈林业造林方法及营林生产管理的措施[J]. 花卉, 2020(12):210-211.
[7]	王发祥. 浅谈森林经营生产管理措施及林业造林方法[J]. 农家科技(上旬刊), 2020(4):148.
[8]	王利军, 陈海霞, 马履一, 等. 栽植密度对沙枣幼苗生长的影响[J]. 林业科技开发, 2010, 24(4):109-113.
[9]	孙景宽, 李田, 夏江宝, 等. 干旱胁迫对沙枣幼苗根茎叶生长及光合色素的影响[J]. 水土保持通报, 2011, 31(1):68-71.
[10]	潘成臣, 刘林德, 赵哈林, 等. 黑河中游沙枣的传粉生物学研究[J]. 中国沙漠, 2012, 32(3):780-783.
[11]	赵新风, 王炜, 张涛, 等. 塔里木河下游地区滴灌沙枣防护林地土壤盐分分布特征[J]. 中国沙漠, 2012, 32(3):763-770.
[12]	李银芳, 吾彼尔·阿迪力, 艾力·吾满江, 等. 不同土壤水分条件和气温对沙枣树出胶的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2006(1):155-158.
[13]	张宝泽, 曹子谊, 赵可夫, 等. 盐胁迫下沙枣某些生理特性的研究[J]. 林业科学, 1992, 28(2):167-169.
[14]	JOSEPH P D. Russian olive, Elaeagnus angustifolia, alters patterns in soil nitrogen pools along the Rio Grande River, New Mexico, USA[J]. Wetlands, 2008, 28(4):896-904.
[15]	HOOGMOED M S. Turtles of the world[J]. Phyllomedusa journal of herpetology, 2006, 5(2):159.
[16]	黄彩变, 曾凡江, 雷加强, 等. 不同灌溉量对头状沙拐枣幼苗生长和生理特性的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2014, 34(12):2500-2507.
[17]	黎燕琼, 刘兴良, 郑绍伟, 等. 岷江上游干旱河谷四种灌木的抗旱生理动态变化[J]. 生态学报, 2007, 27(3):870-878.
[18]	尹丽, 胡庭兴, 刘永安, 等. 干旱胁迫对不同施氮水平麻疯树幼苗光合特性及生长的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2010, 21(3):569-576.
[19]	单长卷, 刘遵春. 土壤水分对嘎拉苹果幼苗水分生理特性和生长特征的影响[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2006, 21(2):42-44.
[20]	李丽霞, 梁宗锁, 韩蕊莲. 土壤干旱对沙棘苗木生长及水分利用的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2002, 22(2):296-302.
[21]	张守仁. 叶绿素荧光动力学参数的意义及讨论[J]. 植物学通报, 1999, 16(4):444.
[22]	姜永雷, 唐探, 陈嘉裔, 等. 镉胁迫对水蕨幼苗叶绿素荧光参数和生理指标的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2015(9):357-360.
[23]	张玉玉, 王进鑫, 马戌, 等. 土壤干旱及复水对侧柏叶绿素荧光参数的影响[J]. 水土保持研究, 2021, 28(2):242-247,255.
[24]	侯娜. 3种乔木树种的叶温和叶绿素荧光参数对土壤水分胁迫的响应[D]. 郑州: 河南农业大学, 2012.
[25]	王方琳, 柴成武, 赵鹏, 等. 3种荒漠植物光合及叶绿素荧光对干旱胁迫的响应及抗旱性评价[J]. 西北植物学报, 2021, 41(10):1755-1765.
[26]	郭有燕, 刘宏军, 孔东升, 等. 干旱胁迫对黑果枸杞幼苗光合特性的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2016, 36(1):124-130.
[27]	朱成刚, 陈亚宁, 李卫红, 等. 干旱胁迫对胡杨PSII光化学效率和激能耗散的影响[J]. 植物学报, 2011, 46(4):413-424. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1259.2011.00413
[28]	南思睿, 罗永忠, 于思敏, 等. 干旱胁迫后复水对新疆大叶苜蓿幼苗光合和叶绿素荧光的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(5):1141-1149. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2022.05.014
[29]	翟秀明, 唐敏, 胡方洁, 等. 高温干旱胁迫对茶树叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 南方农业, 2019, 13(4):46-49,59.
[30]	NULTSCH W, PFAU J, HUPPERTZ K. Photoinhibition of photosynthetic oxygen production and its recovery in the subtidal red alga Polyneura hilliae[J]. Plant biology, 1990, 103(1):62-67.
[31]	陈雪妮, 李建挥, 吴毅, 等. 水分胁迫对2个蓝莓品种叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2019, 39(8):109-114,138.

序号	测定指标	麦盖提3号	策勒大黄	金莎	白沙甜	雅丰	巴楚1号
1	叶片相对含水量	0.5229	0.6575	0.5330	0.5352	0.5377	0.4633
2	叶片水分饱和亏	0.5229	0.6575	0.5330	0.5348	0.5377	0.4629
3	枝条水势	0.3296	0.3132	0.3172	0.2757	0.3005	0.3632
4	初始荧光	0.5213	0.5187	0.6657	0.5833	0.5061	0.6776
5	最大光化学效率	0.5229	0.5357	0.5686	0.6086	0.5286	0.6771
6	实际光能转化效率	0.1594	0.2647	0.4974	0.3274	0.4673	0.4278
7	光合电子传递速率	0.3027	0.2914	0.4966	0.2265	0.4064	0.2487
平均值		0.4117	0.4627	0.5159	0.4416	0.4692	0.4744
抗旱性排序		6	4	1	5	3	2

序号	测定指标	麦盖提3号	策勒大黄	金莎	白沙甜	雅丰	巴楚1号
1	叶片相对含水量	0.5229	0.6575	0.5330	0.5352	0.5377	0.4633
2	叶片水分饱和亏	0.5229	0.6575	0.5330	0.5348	0.5377	0.4629
3	枝条水势	0.3296	0.3132	0.3172	0.2757	0.3005	0.3632
4	初始荧光	0.5213	0.5187	0.6657	0.5833	0.5061	0.6776
5	最大光化学效率	0.5229	0.5357	0.5686	0.6086	0.5286	0.6771
6	实际光能转化效率	0.1594	0.2647	0.4974	0.3274	0.4673	0.4278
7	光合电子传递速率	0.3027	0.2914	0.4966	0.2265	0.4064	0.2487
平均值		0.4117	0.4627	0.5159	0.4416	0.4692	0.4744
抗旱性排序		6	4	1	5	3	2