Responses of Morphological Characteristics and Physiological and Biochemical Index of Marigold Seedlings to Drought Stress

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2024-0364

Abstract

Abstract:

Exploring the growth and physiological response of marigold varieties with different drought tolerance to drought can provide theoretical basis for the study of drought resistance of marigold. Three kinds of marigold seedlings with different drought tolerance were used as materials, different degrees of drought stress were simulated by pot water control method, and normal water management was set as control, natural drought 5, 10, 15 d and rehydration 2 d. The changes of growth and physiological indexes of each variety were measured, and the drought tolerance was evaluated comprehensively. The growth indexes such as plant height, stem diameter, fresh/dry weight and physiological indexes such as chlorophyll, leaf nitrogen content and SOD of marigold seedlings increased under drought stress for 5 d, indicating that mild drought stress was beneficial to promote seedling growth. At 15 d of drought stress, marigold seedlings with different drought tolerance showed significant differences. Among them, ‘1-34-1’ and ‘Big Flower Marigold’ showed wilting in the middle and lower parts of the leaves, the plant height, fresh/dry weight, chlorophyll and nitrogen contents were significantly inhibited, the activities of soluble sugar and SOD were significantly decreased, and the content of MDA was significantly increased. Irreversible damage appeared after rehydration 2 d. The ‘Milestone’ plant stood upright without wilting after 15 d of drought stress, and the indexes were quickly recovered to the control level after 2 d of rehydration. The results of correlation analysis showed that wilting index was positively correlated with plant height and MDA content, and negatively correlated with chlorophyll and leaf nitrogen content. The above indexes were significantly different in different varieties of drought tolerance. In summary, plant height and chlorophyll content at seedling stage of marigold can be used as reference indexes for rapid identification of drought resistance in production practice.

Key words: marigold, drought stress, growth indicators, physiological indicators, germplasm resources, drought resistance, morphological characteristics, physiological response, rehydration

GUO Hao, LI Guangning, LIU Tao, WANG Pu, WEN Panlai, LAI Ming, LYU Xingna. Responses of Morphological Characteristics and Physiological and Biochemical Index of Marigold Seedlings to Drought Stress[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(1): 69-75.

Figures/Tables 7

References 38

[1]	WANG X, LIU X, WANG X, et al. Carotenoid-derived norsesquiterpenoids and sesquiterpenoids from Tagetes erecta L.[J]. Phytochemistry, 2023, 215:113860.
[2]	LIU L B, GUDMUNDSSON L, HAUSER M, et al. Soil moisture dominates dryness stress on ecosystem production globally[J]. Nature communications, 2020, 11(1):4892-4901. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-18631-1 pmid: 32994398
[3]	马俊永, 郑春莲, 曹薇, 等. 我国粮食问题的核心是水资源短缺问题[J]. 农业科学, 2020, 10(5):299-303.
[4]	LIAO W B, HUANG G B, YU J H, et al. Nitric oxide and hydrogen peroxide alleviate drought stress in marigold explants and promote its adventitious root development[J]. Plant physiology and biochemistry, 2012, 58(3):6-15.
[5]	程田田, 陈佳, 赖铭, 等. 芥甘种间杂交甘蓝型油菜花期干旱响应研究[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2023, 41(6):79-87.
[6]	PRINCE S, ANOWER M R, MOTES C M, et al. Intraspecific variation for leaf physiological and root morphological adaptation to drought stress in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.)[J]. Frontiers in plant science, 2022, 13:795011.
[7]	ZAHID Z, KHAN M K R, HAMEED A, et al. Dissection of drought tolerance in upland cotton through morpho-physiological and biochemical traits at seedling stage[J]. Frontiers in plant science, 2021, 12:627107.
[8]	GONZÁLEZ E M. Drought stress tolerance in plants[J]. International journal of molecular sciences, 2023, 24(7):6562.
[9]	LI X, ZHANG X, LIU G, et al. The spike plays important roles in the drought tolerance as compared to the flag leaf through the phenylpropanoid pathway in wheat[J]. Plant physiology and biochemistry, 2020, 152:100-111. doi: S0981-9428(20)30216-3 pmid: 32408177
[10]	CARVALHO M, LINO-NETO T, ROSA E, et al. Cowpea: A legume crop for a challenging environment[J]. Journal of the science of food and agriculture, 2017, 97(13):4273-4284. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.8250 pmid: 28182297
[11]	吕绍芝, 沈庆庆, 饶席兵, 等. 30份割手密种质资源苗期抗旱性综合评价[J]. 西南农业学报, 2024, 37(2):233-241.
[12]	刘文萍, 刘霞霞, 韩俊梅, 等. 芝麻苗期干旱生理生化指标响应特征及其基因表达分析[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2024, 42(1):152-158.
[13]	李召锋, 后斌, 桑志勤, 等. 基于玉米CSSLs群体的苗期抗旱性QTL定位[J]. 分子植物育种, 2024(1).
[14]	沈锦, 颜冬冬, 朱文达, 等. 不同杀菌剂对万寿菊种子的消毒效果及发芽影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2015, 54(13):3138-3141.
[15]	李丕睿. 切花菊品种遗传多样性及观赏性状、抗逆性与分子标记的关联分析[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2014.
[16]	田治国, 王飞, 张文娥, 等. 万寿菊属不同品种初花期抗旱特性分析[J]. 西北植物学报, 2011, 31(7):1390-1399.
[17]	李志宏, 张云贵, 刘宏斌, 等. 叶绿素仪在夏玉米氮营养诊断中的应用[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2005(6):58-62.
[18]	杨虹霞, 龙春瑞, 刘红明, 等. 不同柠檬品种叶片SPAD值、氮素含量与叶绿素含量相关性分析[J]. 热带农业科学, 2019, 39(8):22-28.
[19]	CLEVERS J G P W, GITELSON A A. Remote estimation of crop and grass chlorophyll and nitrogen content using red-edge bands on Sentinel-2 and -3[J]. International journal of applied earth observation and geoinformation, 2013, 23:344-351.
[20]	王云霞, 刘莹, 付雨辰, 等. 干旱胁迫对连翘幼苗非结构性碳分配和水力特性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2024(3).
[21]	GILL S S, ANJUM N A, GILL R, et al. Superoxide dismutase-mentor of abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants[J]. Environmental science and pollution research, 2015, 22(14):10375-10394.
[22]	CARTER D L, VANDERWEIDE B, BLAIR J M. Drought-mediated stem and below-ground bud dynamics in restored grasslands[J]. Applied vegetation science, 2012, 15(4):470-478.
[23]	LIPIEC J, DOUSSAN C, NOSALEWICZ A, et al. Effect of drought and heat stresses on plant growth and yield: A review[J]. International agrophysics, 2013, 27(4):463-477.
[24]	曾露婧, 王国华. 干旱及复水对荒漠绿洲过渡带一年生草本植物生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(5):41-57. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2023302
[25]	ABDELHAKIM L O A, PALMA C F F, ZHOU R, et al. The effect of individual and combined drought and heat stress under elevated CO₂ on physiological responses in spring wheat genotypes[J]. Plant physiology and biochemistry, 2021, 162:301-314.
[26]	孙星邈, 安姝, 于德彬, 等. 烯效唑种子处理对大豆生物学效应和产量的影响[J]. 分子植物育种, 2023, 21(16):5557-5564.
[27]	刘岳昆, 曲善民, 陈露, 等. S₃₃₀₇浸种对连作紫花苜蓿生产性能及生理指标的影响[J]. 草业科学, 2022, 39(10):2145-2150.
[28]	宫彬彬, 王宁, 章铁军, 等. 综合形态与叶片叶绿素含量的番茄壮苗指数筛选[J]. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(8):237-244.
[29]	王金鑫, 宋佳宝, 许北华, 等. 热胁迫对5个品种观赏桃叶片叶绿素含量和叶绿素荧光的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2024, 40(13):47-54. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0392
[30]	CROFT H, CHEN J M, LUO X, et al. Leaf chlorophyll content as a proxy for leaf photosynthetic capacity[J]. Global change biology, 2017, 23(9):3513-3524. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13599 pmid: 27976452
[31]	郑淑霞, 上官周平. 不同功能型植物光合特性及其与叶氮含量、比叶重的关系[J]. 生态学报, 2007(1):171-181.
[32]	HSIAO T C. Plant responses to water stress[J]. Annual review of plant physiology, 1973, 24:519-570.
[33]	CHAVES M M, FLEXAS J, PINHEIRO C. Photosynthesis under drought and salt stress: Regulation mechanisms from whole plant to cell[J]. Annals of botany, 2009, 103(4):551-560. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcn125 pmid: 18662937
[34]	MARTINEAU J R, WILLIAMS J H, SPECHT J E. Temperature tolerance in soybeans II. evaluation of segregating populations for membrane thermostability[J]. Crop science, 1979, 27:467-474.
[35]	WANG G P, ZHANG X Y, LI F, et al. Overaccumulation of glycine betaine enhances tolerance of the photosynthetic apparatus to drought and heat stress in wheat[J]. Photosynthetica, 2010, 48:117-126.
[36]	韩刚. 六种旱生灌木抗旱生理基础研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2010.
[37]	张志录, 刘中华, 陈明辉, 等. 高温干旱胁迫下考来木幼苗的生理响应[J]. 北方园艺, 2017(19):81-88.
[38]	周广, 孙宝腾, 张乐华. 井冈山杜鹃叶片抗氧化系统对高温胁迫的响应[J]. 西北植物学报, 2010, 30(6):1149-1156.

品种	抗旱性	表型	来源	原产地
里程碑	抗旱性强	黄色重瓣	塞诺园艺(F₁)	赤峰
1-34-1	抗旱性弱	桔色重瓣	晨光生物(F₁)	邯郸
大花万寿菊	抗旱性中等	桔色重瓣	蓝翔园艺（自交系）	酒泉

品种	抗旱性	表型	来源	原产地
里程碑	抗旱性强	黄色重瓣	塞诺园艺(F₁)	赤峰
1-34-1	抗旱性弱	桔色重瓣	晨光生物(F₁)	邯郸
大花万寿菊	抗旱性中等	桔色重瓣	蓝翔园艺（自交系）	酒泉

处理	里程碑	1-34-1	大花万寿菊
CK	0.00±0.00c	0.00±0.00e	0.00±0.00d
T₁	0.00±0.00c	8.33±3.82d	0.00±0.00d
T₂	0.00±0.00c	34.00±3.04c	9.50±1.80c
T₃	10.83±3.82a	77.83±4.51a	42.50±2.50a
T₄	3.33±1.44b	67.50±2.50b	31.67±1.44b

处理	里程碑	1-34-1	大花万寿菊
CK	0.00±0.00c	0.00±0.00e	0.00±0.00d
T₁	0.00±0.00c	8.33±3.82d	0.00±0.00d
T₂	0.00±0.00c	34.00±3.04c	9.50±1.80c
T₃	10.83±3.82a	77.83±4.51a	42.50±2.50a
T₄	3.33±1.44b	67.50±2.50b	31.67±1.44b

品种	处理	株高/cm	根长/cm	茎粗/cm	植株鲜重/g	植株干重/g
里程碑	CK	4.10±0.55c	13.02±2.06a	0.34±0.03b	5.43±0.06ab	1.28±0.03ab
	T₁	4.65±0.33b	13.62±1.95a	0.39±0.05a	5.53±0.36a	1.30±0.12a
	T₂	4.80±0.38b	13.82±1.43a	0.38±0.04ab	5.35±0.19ab	1.18±0.05abc
	T₃	4.85±0.34b	13.37±1.04a	0.39±0.04a	4.97±0.37b	1.11±0.17c
	T₄	5.82±0.55a	13.62±0.91a	0.40±0.03a	5.02±0.39b	1.14±0.08bc
1-34-1	CK	10.27±1.07c	15.00±2.20a	0.38±0.05a	7.91±0.09b	1.99±0.03ab
	T₁	15.27±0.99a	15.43±1.91a	0.41±0.05a	8.52±0.36a	2.14±0.09a
	T₂	13.17±0.56b	14.67±1.18a	0.43±0.04a	7.98±0.52b	1.91±0.08b
	T₃	12.23±0.97b	13.58±1.64a	0.40±0.06a	6.47±0.33a	1.42±0.14c
	T₄	15.52±0.68a	13.78±1.30a	0.41±0.03a	6.99±0.16c	1.55±0.03c
大花万寿菊	CK	9.20±0.54b	14.34±1.20a	0.35±0.06a	7.56±0.66a	1.74±0.14ab
	T₁	13.43±1.25a	15.39±1.70a	0.38±0.07a	7.90±0.35a	1.76±0.26a
	T₂	13.70±0.84a	15.28±1.83a	0.39±0.09a	7.49±0.50a	1.62±0.10abc
	T₃	12.95±0.88a	14.23±1.18a	0.39±0.06a	6.62±0.33b	1.43±0.12bc
	T₄	14.17±1.95a	14.43±1.38a	0.41±0.06a	6.84±0.07b	1.44±0.15c