Effects of Gibberellin and Salicylic Acid on Germination, Seedling Growth and Physiology of Tagetes erecta Under Salt Stress

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2026-0047

Abstract

Abstract:

This study aims to investigate the effects of different concentrations of gibberellin (GA₃) and salicylic acid (SA) on seed germination and plant growth physiology of marigold under salt-alkali stress, so as to provide theoretical support and technical guidance for the application of hormones in marigold cultivation under adverse conditions. Using pigment marigold as the test material, pot irrigation was used to simulate a saline growth environment (80 mmol/L). Treatments included clear water and salt stress. Through seed soaking+ seedling foliar spraying, the effects of gibberellin (100, 200 and 400 mg/L) and salicylic acid (200, 400 and 600 mg/L) on marigold seed germination, seedling growth, and physiology under salt stress were studied. The 200 mg/L gibberellin treatment (G2) significantly increased the germination rate of marigold seeds under salt stress by 45.0%, while the germination potential, germination index, and vigor index were increased by 7.92, 1.45 and 3.23 times, respectively. The mean germination time was advanced by 0.74 days. Simultaneously, it significantly increased seedling radicle length and root-to-shoot ratio by 22.3% and 27.5%, respectively, and also increased plant biomass and water content. Additionally, the 400 mg/L salicylic acid treatment (S2) significantly increased the germination potential, germination index, and vigor index under salt stress by 7.93, 1.37 and 4.47 times, respectively. Seedling length, radicle length, and root-to-shoot ratio were increased by 6.3%, 12.1%, and 28.4%, respectively. However, concentrations exceeding G2 and S2 reduced the promotive effects on marigold seed germination and seedling growth. Gibberellin and salicylic acid treatments promoted seed germination and seedling growth of marigold under salt stress by regulating increases in soluble protein content and SOD activity, and decreases in osmotic adjustment substances such as soluble sugar and proline content. Seed soaking and exogenous spraying of GA₃ and SA are beneficial for promoting seed germination and seedling growth of marigold under salt stress. The promoting effects are optimal at 200 mg/L GA₃ and 400 mg/L SA.

Key words: gibberellin, salicylic acid, Tagetes erecta, salt stress, growth, physiology

CLC Number:

S681

WANG Yanan, LI Tao, HE Shihao, PALINUR·Aiwaili, WANG Jiafeng, WANG Xin, LI Zhiyuan, QIN Yong. Effects of Gibberellin and Salicylic Acid on Germination, Seedling Growth and Physiology of Tagetes erecta Under Salt Stress[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(16): 100-109.

Figures/Tables 20

References 25

[1]	孙晨. 3种植物生长调节剂对百日草及万寿菊生长发育的影响[D]. 长春: 吉林农业大学, 2018.
[2]	胡文悦. 槲皮万寿菊素对氧化应激肉鸡肉品质、肌肉氧化还原状态和盲肠微生物的影响[D]. 保定: 河北农业大学, 2025.
[3]	马雪璟, 唐楠, 唐道城, 等. 万寿菊杂交F₁代杂种优势及遗传变异分析[J]. 种子, 2024, 43(9):78-85.
[4]	周膂卓, 常宗强, 吴雨霞. 连古城自然保护区3种盐爪爪属(Kalidium)植物根际土壤细菌群落结构[J]. 中国沙漠, 2025(1):1-10.
[5]	杨靖, 王欣. ZF-HD、NHX在植物/苹果盐胁迫中的研究进展[J]. 邯郸职业技术学院学报, 2024, 37(4):29-32.
[6]	孟庆果, 李玲, 高广增, 等. 球毛壳菌ND35对盐胁迫下辣椒幼苗生长和生理特性的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2024, 56(12):47-53.
[7]	刘澳, 张雅婧, 陈己任. 盐胁迫下月季的生长发育及生理生态学研究进展[J]. 农业与技术, 2024, 44(22):117-120.
[8]	唐红, 薛娜娜, 陶宣霖, 等. 赤霉素和褪黑素对盐碱胁迫下紫斑牡丹幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2026(5):1-10.
[9]	王俊斌, 王海凤, 刘海学. 水杨酸促进盐胁迫条件下水稻种子萌发的机理研究[J]. 华北农学报, 2012, 27(4):223-227. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7091.2012.04.043
[10]	曾成城, 秦芳, 李琴, 等. 外源施硅和水杨酸对盐胁迫下甜瓜幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2025, 38(5):125-131.
[11]	贾述林, 张玉苗, 王凤垚, 等. 水杨酸对盐胁迫下不同饲草种子萌发的影响[J]. 山东农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2025, 56(5):841-848.
[12]	王静, 蒋倩, 陶田田, 等. 外源钙对盐碱胁迫下万寿菊生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2024, 44(9):1345-1354.
[13]	韦朝妹, 胡小京, 莫幻. 外源赤霉素对盐胁迫下万寿菊种子萌发与幼苗生长的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2022(16):69-75.
[14]	曹智, 郭志英, 林振华, 等. SA和GA₃浸种对盐胁迫下青蒿种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 北方园艺, 2024(21):76-83.
[15]	BRADFORD M. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantization of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein dye binding[J]. Analytical biochemistry, 1976, 72(1-2):248-254. doi: 10.1016/0003-2697(76)90527-3 URL
[16]	LIU W, ZHU D W, LIU D H, et al. Influence of nitrogen on the primary and secondary metabolism and synthesis of flavonoids in Chrysanthemum Ramat[J]. Journal of plant nutrition, 2010, 33(2):240-254. doi: 10.1080/01904160903434287 URL
[17]	PATEL J A, VORA A B. Free proline accumulation in drought-stressed plants[J]. Plant and soil, 1985, 84:427-429. doi: 10.1007/BF02275480 URL
[18]	PINHEIRO H A, FABIO M D, CHAVES A R M, et al. Drought tolerance in relation to protection against oxidative stress in clones of Coffea canephora subjected to long-term drought[J]. Plant science, 2004, 167(6):1307-1314. doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2004.06.027 URL
[19]	许人颖, 罗梓豪, 包心蕊, 等. 新疆17个主推棉花品种萌发期及幼苗期耐盐性鉴定[J]. 中国棉花, 2024, 51(10):25-31.
[20]	张晓婷, 刘培源, 田媛, 等. 盐胁迫对玉米毛状根植株根系及光合作用的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2020, 48(15):95-99.
[21]	殷缘, 程爽, 刘定豪, 等. 外源过氧化氢(H₂O₂)影响非生物胁迫下植物生长与生理代谢机制的研究进展[J]. 生物技术通报, 2025, 41(1):1-13. doi: 10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2024-0590
[22]	宋繁. 宁夏枸杞响应盐胁迫的蛋白质琥珀酰化修饰调控机制研究[D]. 银川: 宁夏大学, 2023.
[23]	YU Z P, DUAN X B, LUO L, et al. How plant hormones mediate salt stress responses[J]. Trends in plant science, 2020, 25(11):1117-1130. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2020.06.008 pmid: 32675014
[24]	BLAZQUEZ M A, NELSON D C, WEIJERS D. Evolution of plant hormone response pathways[J]. Annual review of plant biology, 2020, 71:327-353. doi: 10.1146/annurev-arplant-050718-100309 pmid: 32017604
[25]	宁陈宁, 林小兰, 李俊, 等. 采前赤霉素处理对‘石硖’龙眼常温贮藏性的影响[J]. 现代食品科技, 2025, 41(2):153-166.

处理	激素处理水平
CK1	清水
G0	盐处理
G1	盐处理+100 mg/L GA₃
G2	盐处理+200 mg/L GA₃
G3	盐处理+400 mg/L GA₃
CK2	清水
S0	盐处理
S1	盐处理+200 mg/L SA
S2	盐处理+400 mg/L SA
S3	盐处理+600 mg/L SA

处理	激素处理水平
CK1	清水
G0	盐处理
G1	盐处理+100 mg/L GA₃
G2	盐处理+200 mg/L GA₃
G3	盐处理+400 mg/L GA₃
CK2	清水
S0	盐处理
S1	盐处理+200 mg/L SA
S2	盐处理+400 mg/L SA
S3	盐处理+600 mg/L SA

处理编号	起始萌发日/d	发芽率/%	发芽势/%	发芽指数	活力指数	平均发芽时间/d
CK1	3	49.32±2.34b	5.00±0.38f	21.36±2.83d	5.94±0.64e	10.67±0.37a
G0	4	38.22±3.25d	4.00±0.45e	18.34±1.58e	4.56±0.62f	9.69±0.12b
G1	4	43.36±4.12c	22.67±2.45d	35.94±3.24c	15.82±1.82c	9.33±0.14c
G2	4	55.42±3.84a	35.67±3.22c	44.86±3.62a	19.28±1.63b	8.95±0.13d
G3	4	52.35±4.77ab	31.33±2.84b	40.36±4.05b	13.93±1.23d	9.13±0.12d
CK2	3	44.57±2.15b	6.00±0.25f	22.30±2.58d	5.58±0.28e	10.38±0.18a
S0	4	39.26±3.47d	4.33±0.16e	19.18±1.49e	4.72±0.36f	9.36±0.24c
S1	4	38.76±3.92d	35.33±3.81b	37.94±3.28c	17.45±1.48b	9.03±0.03d
S2	4	38.39±2.74d	38.67±2.62a	45.37±4.81a	25.81±2.47a	9.34±0.12c
S3	4	38.12±4.55d	34.00±3.28b	42.04±3.92a	16.42±1.35b	9.42±0.17c

处理编号	起始萌发日/d	发芽率/%	发芽势/%	发芽指数	活力指数	平均发芽时间/d
CK1	3	49.32±2.34b	5.00±0.38f	21.36±2.83d	5.94±0.64e	10.67±0.37a
G0	4	38.22±3.25d	4.00±0.45e	18.34±1.58e	4.56±0.62f	9.69±0.12b
G1	4	43.36±4.12c	22.67±2.45d	35.94±3.24c	15.82±1.82c	9.33±0.14c
G2	4	55.42±3.84a	35.67±3.22c	44.86±3.62a	19.28±1.63b	8.95±0.13d
G3	4	52.35±4.77ab	31.33±2.84b	40.36±4.05b	13.93±1.23d	9.13±0.12d
CK2	3	44.57±2.15b	6.00±0.25f	22.30±2.58d	5.58±0.28e	10.38±0.18a
S0	4	39.26±3.47d	4.33±0.16e	19.18±1.49e	4.72±0.36f	9.36±0.24c
S1	4	38.76±3.92d	35.33±3.81b	37.94±3.28c	17.45±1.48b	9.03±0.03d
S2	4	38.39±2.74d	38.67±2.62a	45.37±4.81a	25.81±2.47a	9.34±0.12c
S3	4	38.12±4.55d	34.00±3.28b	42.04±3.92a	16.42±1.35b	9.42±0.17c

主成分	初始特征值			提取载荷平方和
主成分	总计	方差百分比/%	累积贡献率/%	总计	方差百分比/%	累积贡献率/%
1	9.0643	81.673	81.673	9.0643	82.704	81.673
2	1.335	9.216	92.570	1.037	9.216	92.570
3	0.492	4.265	96.463
4	0.174	1.327	98.082
5	0.119	1.096	99.294
6	0.039	0.436	99.583
7	0.027	0.267	99.983
8	0.0012	0.02	99.997
9	0	0.003	99.999
10	0	0.001	100
11	0	0.0000137	100