首页 > 过刊浏览>2022年第30卷第2期 >202-212. DOI:10.11926/jtsb.4428
PDF HTML阅读 XML下载 导出引用 引用提醒
木芙蓉对淹水胁迫的响应及其耐涝性综合评价
作者:
基金项目:

四川省重点研发项目（2020YFN0004）资助


Response of Hibiscus mutabilis to Waterlogging Stress and Comprehensive Evaluation of Waterlogging Tolerance
Author:
  • 摘要
    • | |
  • 访问统计
    • |
  • 参考文献 [32]
    • |
  • 相似文献
    • |
  • 引证文献
    • | |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    为挖掘木芙蓉（Hibiscus mutabilis）耐涝种质资源，对13个木芙蓉品种水淹15 d后的形态和生理生化指标进行研究，并构建耐涝评价体系。结果表明，水淹胁迫后，木芙蓉品种各性状的变化趋势和幅度均不同，部分性状间的相关性显著（P<0.05）。14个指标按贡献率大小归因为形态生长指标、不定根形态指标、膜脂过氧化指标、根系生物量指标、抗氧化指标及渗透调节指标。根据综合耐涝评价值（D）进行聚类分析，表明13个木芙蓉品种可分为强耐涝（3个品种）、较强耐涝（5个品种）、中等耐涝（3个品种）和不耐涝（2个品种）等4个类型。因此，株高、不定根数、不定根长可作为木芙蓉苗期耐涝性快速、简便的鉴定指标。

    Abstract:

    In order to excavate the waterlogging resistant germplasm resources of Hibiscus mutabilis, the morphological, physiological and biochemical indexes of 13 cultivars were studied after 15 days of flooding, and build the evaluation system of waterlogging resistance. The results showed that the variation trend and range of morphological and physiological indexes were different among cultivars, and the correlation of some indexes was significant (P<0.05). The 14 indexes were attributed to morphological growth index, adventitious root morphological index, membrane lipid peroxidation index, root biomass index, antioxidant index and osmotic regulation index according to contribution rate. Cluster analysis conducted according to comprehensive waterlogging resistance evaluation value (D) showed that 13 H. mutabilis varieties could be divided into four waterlogging tolerance types, including very strong (3 varieties), stronger (5 varieties), medium (3 varieties) and none waterlogging tolerance (2 varieties). Therefore, the plant height, adventitious root number, adventitious root length could be used as rapid and simple indexes to identify the comprehensive waterlogging tolerance at seedling stage in H. mutabilis.

    参考文献
    [1] BAILEY-SERRES J, VOESENEK L A C J. Flooding stress:Accli-mations and genetic diversity[J]. Annu Rev Plant Biol, 2008, 59:313-339. doi:10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092752.
    [2] LORETI E, VAN VEEN H, PERATA P. Plant responses to flooding stress[J]. Curr Opin Plant Biol, 2016, 33:64-71. doi:10.1016/j.pbi. 2016.06.005.
    [3] ZHOU W G, CHEN F, MENG Y J, et al. Plant waterlogging/flooding stress responses:From seed germination to maturation[J]. Plant Physiol Biochem, 2020, 148:228-236. doi:10.1016/j.plaphy.2020.01.020.
    [4] YAMAUCHI T, WATANABE K, FUKAZAWA A, et al. Ethylene and reactive oxygen species are involved in root aerenchyma formation and adaptation of wheat seedlings to oxygen-deficient conditions[J]. J Exp Bot, 2014, 65(1):261-273. doi:10.1093/jxb/ert371.
    [5] CHEN L, OGOREK L L P, PEDERSEN O, et al. Oxygen in the air and oxygen dissolved in the floodwater both sustain growth of aquatic adventitious roots in rice[J]. J Exp Bot, 2020, 72(5):1879-1890. doi:10.1093/jxb/eraa542.
    [6] YAMAUCHI T, COLMER T D, PEDERSEN O, et al. Regulation of root traits for internal aeration and tolerance to soil waterlogging-flooding stress[J]. Plant Physiol, 2018, 176(2):1118-1130. doi:10. 1104/pp.17.01157.
    [7] QU L L, FANG W M, CHEN F D, et al. Comprehensive appraisal of the ornamental value and drought and flooding resistance of Guoqing Chrysanthemum with small inflorescences[J]. Sci Agric Sin, 2012, 45(4):734-742. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.04.014. 翟丽丽, 房伟民, 陈发棣, 等. 国庆小菊观赏性和耐旱、涝性的综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(4):734-742. doi:10.3864/j.issn. 0578-1752.2012.04.014.
    [8] YIN D M, GUAN Z Y, CHEN S M, et al. Establishment of evaluation system for waterlogging tolerance and identification of waterlogging tolerance in chrysanthemum morifolium and its related genera plants[J]. J Plant Genet Resour, 2009, 10(3):399-404. doi:10.13430/j.cnki. jpgr.2009.03.021. 尹冬梅, 管志勇, 陈素梅, 等. 菊花及其近缘种属植物耐涝评价体系建立及耐涝性鉴定[J]. 植物遗传资源学报, 2009, 10(3):399-404. doi:10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2009.03.021.
    [9] SHI H J, XI J W, ZHU X T. Screening of waterlogging tolerant peony cultivars by phenotypic characteristics[J]. J Jinling Inst Technol, 2018, 34(1):88-92. doi:10.16515/j.cnki.32-1722/n.2018.01.0021. 时浩杰, 奚建伟, 朱向涛. 应用表型特征筛选耐涝牡丹品种研究[J]. 金陵科技学院学报, 2018, 34(1):88-92. doi:10.16515/j.cnki.32-1722/n.2018.01.0021.
    [10] ZHU X T, JIN S H, AI J G, et al. Evaluation of waterlogging tolerance of peony variety[J]. J Nucl Agric Sci, 2017, 31(3):607-613. doi:10. 11869/j.issn.100-8551.2017.03.0607. 朱向涛, 金松恒, 哀建国, 等. 牡丹不同品种耐涝性综合评价[J]. 核农学报, 2017, 31(3):607-613. doi:10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2017. 03.0607.
    [11] GUO X Y, HUANG Z Y, XU A C, et al. A comparison of physiological, morphological and growth responses of 13 hybrid poplar clones to flooding[J]. Forestry, 2011, 84(1):1-12. doi:10.1093/forestry/cpq037.
    [12] WANG Z Y. Research on physiological characters of nine woody plants seedlings under waterlogging stress[D]. Nanjing:Nanjing Forestry University, 2014:40-44. 王哲宇. 九种木本植物幼苗的淹水胁迫生理特征研究[D]. 南京:南京林业大学, 2014:40-44.
    [13] ZHAO B, ZHANG F, XUE C R. Antioxidant properties of Hibiscus mutabilis L. seedling leaves under NaCl stress[J]. Shandong Agric Sci, 2016, 48(11):57-60. doi:10.14083/j.issn.1001-4942.2016.11.013. 赵兵, 张凡, 薛春荣. NaCl胁迫下木芙蓉幼苗叶片的抗氧化特性[J]. 山东农业科学, 2016, 48(11):57-60. doi:10.14083/j.issn.1001-4942.2016.11.013.
    [14] TONG L L, WANG Z Y, XU X G. Effects of flooding stress on morphological & physiological property of Hibiscus mutabilis[J]. J Beihua Univ (Nat Sci), 2020, 21(2):253-256. doi:10.11713/j.issn. 1009-4822.2020.02.025. 童丽丽, 王哲宇, 许晓岗. 淹水胁迫对木芙蓉幼苗形态及部分生理指标的影响[J]. 北华大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 21(2):253-256. doi:10.11713/j.issn.1009-4822.2020.02.025.
    [15] LI H S. Experimental Principle and Technology of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry[M]. Beijing:Higher Education Press, 2003:10-78. 李合生. 植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M]. 北京:高等教育出版社, 2003:10-78.
    [16] WANG Y H, GAO H W, WANG Z, et al. Study and evaluation of drought resistance capacity of Medicago glutinosa germplasm resources at seedling stage[J]. J Plant Genet Resour, 2009, 10(3):443-447. doi:10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2009.03.012. 王艳慧, 高洪文, 王赞, 等. 胶质苜蓿种质资源苗期抗旱性综合评价[J]. 植物遗传资源学报, 2009, 10(3):443-447. doi:10.13430/j. cnki.jpgr.2009.03.012.
    [17] XIE Z J. Fuzzy Mathematical Methods in Agricultural Science[M]. Wuhan:Huazhong University of Science and Technology Press, 1983:99-193. 谢志坚. 农业科学中的模糊数学方法[M]. 武汉:华中理工大学出版社, 1983:99-193.
    [18] LIU X Q, SUN X L, LIU Y S, et al. Spatial division of climate change and its evolution characteristics in southwest China based on REOF-EEMD[J]. Geogr Res, 2020, 39(5):213-230. doi:10.11821/dlyj020190387. 刘晓琼, 孙曦亮, 刘彦随, 等. 基于REOF-EEMD的西南地区气候变化区域分异特征[J]. 地理研究, 2020, 39(5):213-230. doi:10. 11821/dlyj020190387.
    [19] LI Q H, LIU S P, ZHI C Y, et al. Adaptation mechanism of three herbs in the water-level-fluctuation-zone of reservoir to complete submer-gence[J]. J Trop Subtrop Bot, 2013, 21(5):459-465. doi:10.3969/j. issn.1005-3395.2013.05.013. 李秋华, 刘送平, 支崇远, 等. 三种水库消落带草本植物对完全水淹的适应机制研究[J]. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2013, 21(5):459-465. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1005-3395.2013.05.013.
    [20] CHEN F Q, HUANG Y Z, ZENG X, et al. Biological response of cynodon dactylon vegetative propagule to simulated flooding[J]. J Trop Subtrop Bot, 2010, 18(1):15-20. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1005-3395. 2010.01.003. 陈芳清, 黄友珍, 曾旭, 等. 狗牙根营养繁殖体对模拟水淹的生物学响应[J]. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2010, 18(1):15-20. doi:10. 3969/j.issn.1005-3395.2010.01.003.
    [21] VOESENEK L A C J, BAILEY-SERRES J. Flood adaptive traits and processes:An overview[J]. New Phytol, 2015, 206(1):57-73. doi:10. 1111/nph.13209.
    [22] LIU C C, LAN C J, LI H, et al. Responses of waterlogging stress and evaluation of waterlogging tolerance in cherry tomato at seedling stage[J]. J Nucl Agric Sci, 2020, 34(3):650-660. doi:10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2020.03.0650. 刘聪聪, 兰超杰, 李欢, 等. 樱桃番茄苗期对淹水胁迫的响应及其耐涝性评价[J]. 核农学报, 2020, 34(3):650-660. doi:10.11869/j. issn.100-8551.2020.03.0650.
    [23] SAFAVI-RIZI V, HERDE M, STÖHR C. RNA-Seq reveals novel genes and pathways associated with hypoxia duration and tolerance in tomato root[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1):1692. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-57884-0.
    [24] CHO H Y, LORETI E, SHIH M C, et al. Energy and sugar signaling during hypoxia[J]. New Phytol, 2021, 229(1):57-63. doi:10.1111/nph.16326.
    [25] AYDOGAN C, TURHAN E. Changes in morphological and physiolo-gical traits and stress-related enzyme activities of green bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes in response to waterlogging stress and recovery treatment[J]. Hort Environ Biotechnol, 2015, 56(3):391-401. doi:10. 1007/s13580-015-0127-9.
    [26] PENG Y J, ZHOU Z X, ZHE Z, et al. Molecular and physiological responses in roots of two full-sib poplars uncover mechanisms that contribute to differences in partial submergence tolerance[J]. Sci Rep, 2018, 8(1):12829. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-30821-y.
    [27] ELSE M A, JANOWIAK F, ATKINSON C J, et al. Root signals and stomatal closure in relation to photosynthesis, chlorophyll a fluore-scence and adventitious rooting of flooded tomato plants[J]. Ann Bot, 2009, 103(2):313-323. doi:10.1093/aob/mcn208.
    [28] WANG X Y, SHI J H, LIU M X, et al. Effects of flood overtopping on leaf osmotic adjustment substances and antioxidant enzyme activities of natural Populus euphratica forest in the middle reaches of the Tarim River[J]. Arid Zone Res, 2020, 37(6):1544-1551. doi:10.13866/j.azr. 2020.06.20. 王新英, 史军辉, 刘茂秀, 等. 洪水漫溢对塔里木河中游天然胡杨林叶渗透调节物质及抗氧化酶活性的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2020, 37(6):1544-1551. doi:10.13866/j.azr.2020.06.20.
    [29] WU J, WU J S. Effect of flooding stress on physiological and bio-chemical of Cleyera japonica seedlings[J]. J NE For Univ, 2015, 43(4):34-36. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-5382.2015.04.008. 吴江, 吴家胜. 淹水胁迫对杨桐幼苗生理生化性质的影响[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2015, 43(4):34-36. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-5382. 2015.04.008.
    [30] ARBONA V, HOSSAIN Z, LÓPEZ-CLIMENT M F, et al. Antioxidant enzymatic activity is linked to waterlogging stress tolerance in Citrus[J]. Physiol Plant, 2008, 132(4):452-466. doi:10.1111/j.1399-3054. 2007.01029.x.
    [31] WANY A, GUPTA K J. Reactive oxygen species, nitric oxide pro-duction and antioxidant gene expression during development of aerenchyma formation in wheat[J]. Plant Signal Behav, 2018, 13(2):e1428515. doi:10.1080/15592324.2018.1428515.
    [32] MA R J, ZHANG B B, CAI Z X, et al. Evaluation of peach rootstock waterlogging tolerance based on the responses of the photosynthetic indexes to continuous submergence stress[J]. Acta Hort Sin, 2013, 40(3):409-416. doi:10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2013.03.002. 马瑞娟, 张斌斌, 蔡志翔, 等. 不同桃砧木品种对淹水的光合响应及其耐涝性评价[J]. 园艺学报, 2013, 40(3):409-416. doi:10. 16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2013.03.002.
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

徐倩,邬梦晞,曾心美,姜贝贝,贾茵,李梦霞,张曼瑜,张璐,蔡露,黄文沛,潘远智.木芙蓉对淹水胁迫的响应及其耐涝性综合评价[J].热带亚热带植物学报,2022,30(2):202~212

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:206
  • 下载次数: 650
  • HTML阅读次数: 625
  • 引用次数: 0
历史
  • 收稿日期:2021-04-16
  • 最后修改日期:2021-06-07
  • 在线发布日期: 2022-03-30
文章二维码
您是第 位访问者
主管单位：中国科学院
主办单位：中国科学院华南植物园 广东省植物学会
地址：广州市天河区兴科路723号 中国科学院华南植物园 《热带亚热带植物学报》编辑部
电话：86 (0)20-3725 2514
热带亚热带植物学报 ® 2025 版权所有