Effects of Drought Stress on Yield and Dry Matter Accumulation and Distribution of Kenaf in Vigorous Growing Period

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2024-0574

Abstract

Abstract:

To explore the effects of different drought stresses on the yield, dry matter accumulation and distribution of kenaf. we selected the kenaf at vigorous growth stage as the research material for a pot experiment, combined with artificial water control, four water gradients and four time gradients were set for the experiment, to analyze the response of dry matter accumulation, distribution and yield of kenaf to different drought stresses. The results showed:(1) Under light and moderate stress for 5 d-10 d, the yields of kenaf increased by 0.46%-5.87%, and decreased by 7.17%-49.30% under other conditions.(2) The economic characters decreased obviously after 5 days of stress, except for the overall little change of stem diameter and skin thickness. (3) Droughts inhibited the growth of roots, and the distribution ratio decreased by 6.75%-35.14% compared with the control group; leaf and bone growth were stimulated, the bone distribution index increased by 1.97%-25.36%, leaf distribution index after stress 10 days increased by 13.96%-42.39%. Dry matter distribution of the bark showed a parabolic trend, reaching the highest point after 10 d stress, which increased by 4.20%-14.39% compared with the control. (4) Correlation and path analysis showed that dry bark weight per plant (direct effect 1.038) and plant height (indirect effect 0.201) played a key role in yield increase, while bone and leaf distribution index were negatively correlated with yield. (5) In terms of comprehensive stress degree and time effect, 10 days of moderate stress can be used as the critical value of kenaf drought in southern Henan. This study revealed the dry matter distribution strategy of kenaf under drought stress, and provided a theoretical basis for drought-resistant cultivation.

Key words: Kenaf, drought, stress, dry matter accumulation and distribution, yield

ZHANG Lixia, SHI Pengfei, SHEN Peilin, LIU Yao, CHENG Jie, ZHANG Lin, DING Li, DU Guanghui, NIE Liangpeng, WEI Yimiao, LV Yuhu, LI Mei, PAN Ziliang, CHEN Yingxia, FAN Jiahui. Effects of Drought Stress on Yield and Dry Matter Accumulation and Distribution of Kenaf in Vigorous Growing Period[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(20): 18-26.

Figures/Tables 9

References 25

[1]	熊和平. 麻类作物多用途的理论与技术[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社,2022:1-31.
[2]	安霞, 金关荣, 陈常理, 等. 红麻、亚麻和黄麻种子萌发期的耐旱性比较[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2019, 60(1):3.
[3]	闫永銮, 郝卫平, 梅旭荣, 等. 拔节期水分胁迫-复水对冬小麦干物质积累和水分利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业气象, 201l. 32(2):190-195.
[4]	张维, 郭丽琢. 不同生育时期的干旱胁迫对豌豆干物质积累及产量的影响[J]. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2015, 50(1):48-52.
[5]	穆心愿, 夏来坤, 谷利敏, 等. 花期干旱胁迫对不同夏玉米品种花后干物质积累运转及产量的影响[J]. 南方农业学报, 2021, 52(4):931-941.
[6]	赵宏伟, 田雪飞, 于美芳, 等. 孕穗期干旱胁迫对寒地粳稻干物质积累、转运及产量形成影响[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 2016. 47(11):1-8.
[7]	朱铁霞, 高阳, 高凯, 等. 干旱胁迫下菊芋各器官生物量及物质分配规律[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(21):8021-8026.
[8]	LV X Y, ZHAO L, MA Y S, et al. Effects of drought on growth and yield of pepper[J]. Agricultural science technology, 2023, 24(3):15-21.
[9]	王道波. 红麻水肥调控效应及其供应模式优化[D]. 南宁: 广西大学, 2014.
[10]	揭雨成, 王朝云. 红麻水分胁迫及水,肥效应研究[J]. 中国麻业科学, 2000, 22(2):23-26,45.
[11]	张丽霞, 郭晓彦, 史鹏飞, 等. 旺长期干旱胁迫对红麻生长发育、产量及效益的影响. 作物杂志, 2023(1):184-189.
[12]	罗登杰. DNA甲基化调控红麻抗旱性杂种优势的机理研究[D]. 南宁: 广西大学, 2023.
[13]	许佩林. 红麻抗旱性及根系性状基因型差异研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2023.
[14]	姜海清. 红麻干旱胁迫的蛋白质组学初步研究[D]. 福州: 福建农林大学, 2008.
[15]	李辉, 李德芳, 邓勇, 等. 红麻非生物逆境胁迫响应基因HCWRKY71表达分析及转化拟南芥[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(6):1090-1099. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.04201
[16]	邓接楼, 张高阳, 张宗良, 等. 红麻转录因子基因HcNAC1的分离及其在干旱胁迫下的表达模式[J]. 农业生物技术学报, 2021, 29(2):251-257.
[17]	王婧, 王雨千, 刘立军. 不同浓度硅提高红麻抗旱机理研究[J]. 中国麻业科学, 2024, 46(3):162-168.
[18]	高小锋, 王进鑫, 张波, 等. 不同生长期干旱胁迫对刺槐幼树干物质分配的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2010, 29(6):1103-1108.
[19]	李威. 拔节期干旱胁迫对冬小麦光合特性,生长发育及产量影响研究[D]. 合肥: 安徽农业大学, 2019.
[20]	李秀芬, 马树庆, 于海, 等. 春大豆鼓粒至成熟期水分胁迫对结实和产量的影响[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2021, 37(5):86-92.
[21]	贾斯淳, 王娜, 郝兴宇, 等. 不同干旱胁迫处理对大豆品种生长及逆境生理的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2019, 34(5):8.
[22]	王利彬, 祖伟, 董守坤, 等. 干旱程度及时期对复水后大豆生长和代谢补偿效应的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(11):150-156.
[23]	黄彩霞, 柴守玺, 赵德明, 等. 灌溉对干旱区冬小麦干物质积累、分配和产量的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2014, 38(12):1333-1344.
[24]	李思忠, 高卫时, 张立明, 等. 干旱对甜菜叶丛期光系统Ⅱ及光合作用的影响[J]. 草业科学, 2021, 38(8):1548-1558.
[25]	黄承建, 赵思毅, 王龙昌, 等. 干旱胁迫对苎麻光合特性和产量的影响[J]. 中国麻业科学, 2012, 34(6):273-277.

处理	胁迫程度		胁迫时间/d	代码
1	CK	75%~80%	0	T₁
2	LS	60%~65%	5	T₂
3	LS	60%~65%	10	T₃
4	LS	60%~65%	15	T₄
5	LS	60%~65%	20	T₅
6	MS	40%~45%	5	T₆
7	MS	40%~45%	10	T₇
8	MS	40%~45%	15	T₈
9	MS	40%~45%	20	T₉
10	SS	20%~25%	5	T₁₀
11	SS	20%~25%	10	T₁₁
12	SS	20%~25%	15	T₁₂
13	SS	20%~25%	20	T₁₃

处理	胁迫程度		胁迫时间/d	代码
1	CK	75%~80%	0	T₁
2	LS	60%~65%	5	T₂
3	LS	60%~65%	10	T₃
4	LS	60%~65%	15	T₄
5	LS	60%~65%	20	T₅
6	MS	40%~45%	5	T₆
7	MS	40%~45%	10	T₇
8	MS	40%~45%	15	T₈
9	MS	40%~45%	20	T₉
10	SS	20%~25%	5	T₁₀
11	SS	20%~25%	10	T₁₁
12	SS	20%~25%	15	T₁₂
13	SS	20%~25%	20	T₁₃

变异来源	株高	茎粗	皮厚	单株干皮重	纤维产量
胁迫程度(SD)	126.14^**	5.28^*	9.13^**	628.50^**	501.02^**
胁迫时间(ST)	21.55^*	32.94^**	43.60^**	638.73^**	394.04^**
胁迫程度×胁迫时间SD×ST	8.25^**	2.32	6.59^**	60.37^**	58.39^**

变异来源	株高	茎粗	皮厚	单株干皮重	纤维产量
胁迫程度(SD)	126.14^**	5.28^*	9.13^**	628.50^**	501.02^**
胁迫时间(ST)	21.55^*	32.94^**	43.60^**	638.73^**	394.04^**
胁迫程度×胁迫时间SD×ST	8.25^**	2.32	6.59^**	60.37^**	58.39^**

影响因子	DWs	DWb	DWl	DWr	SDi	BDi	LDi	RDi
胁迫程度(SD)	628.50^**	148.68^**	100.06^**	757.73^**	56.28^**	114.17^**	74.20^**	332.95^**
胁迫时间(ST)	638.73^**	104.03^**	22.05^*	201.57^**	116.51^**	183.98^**	365.76^**	143.17^**
胁迫程度×胁迫时间SD×ST	60.37^**	44.32^**	4.74^**	40.76^**	26.57^**	23.38^**	41.40^**	42.79^**