林业科学 ›› 2021, Vol. 57 ›› Issue (2): 39-48.doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20210205
陈旋1,2,胡颖3,孙明升4,贾婕1,5,杨章旗1,5,*
收稿日期:
2019-08-20
出版日期:
2021-02-25
发布日期:
2021-03-29
通讯作者:
杨章旗
基金资助:
Xuan Chen1,2,Ying Hu3,Mingsheng Sun4,Jie Jia1,5,Zhangqi Yang1,5,*
Received:
2019-08-20
Online:
2021-02-25
Published:
2021-03-29
Contact:
Zhangqi Yang
摘要:
目的: 研究外源调节物质对格木幼苗响应铅胁迫的生理特性和抗逆能力,探讨格木对铅胁迫的响应机制,为格木的栽培、引种及重金属污染土壤的修复提供理论指导。方法: 以1年生格木幼苗为试材,通过不同浓度甜菜碱(BT)、水杨酸(SA)、茉莉酸甲酯(MeJA)和氯化钙(CaCl2)的处理,研究其对铅(10 mmol·L-1)胁迫下格木幼苗抗氧化酶活性,渗透调节物质含量,叶片细胞膜透性以及叶绿素含量(SPAD值)的影响。结果: 铅胁迫明显抑制格木幼苗生长,致使其渗透调节物质含量显著减少、MDA含量及RC明显增加、光合色素合成受抑。而SOD、POD和CAT活性较无胁迫对照(CK1)提高7.0%、1 221.6%和121.0%,格木幼苗具有一定的抗铅胁迫能力。外源调节物质对格木幼苗抗氧化酶活性的激活、PRO和SP含量的增加、MDA的降解、RC的降低和叶绿素的合成有显著作用,对SS含量无促进作用。与铅胁迫对照(CK2)相比,施加MeJA 0.1 mmol·L-1,SOD活性提升13.2%;100 mg·L-1的BT,CAT活性增强17.7%;25 mg·L-1的SA,POD活性提高36.2%;1 mmol·L-1的MeJA,PRO含量提高157.3%;1 000 mg·L-1的BT,SP含量增加71.9%;5 mmol·L-1的CaCl2,SPAD值增大22.9%;100 mg·L-1的BT,MDA含量降低58.9%,BT一定程度降低RC。相关性分析显示,各生理指标之间存在直接或间接的内在关联性,彼此促进或拮抗,对铅胁迫损伤进行动态修复调节。结论: 外源调节物质可有效缓解铅对格木幼苗的伤害,与格木幼苗产生适应性诱导以抵抗铅胁迫的外源调节物质表现为:1 mmol·L-1 MeJA > 20 mmol·L-1 CaCl2 > 100 mg·L-1 BT > 5 mmol·L-1 CaCl2 > 0.1 mmol·L-1 MeJA > 500 mg·L-1 BT > CK2。
中图分类号:
陈旋,胡颖,孙明升,贾婕,杨章旗. 外源调节物质对铅胁迫下格木幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2021, 57(2): 39-48.
Xuan Chen,Ying Hu,Mingsheng Sun,Jie Jia,Zhangqi Yang. Effects of Exogenous Regulating Substances on Physiological Characteristics of Erythrophleum fordii Seedlings Under Lead Stress[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(2): 39-48.
表1
铅胁迫下不同处理对格木幼苗抗氧化酶活性的影响①"
处理 Treatment | SOD活性 SOD activity/(U·g-1 FW) | POD活性 POD activity/(U·mg-1 FW) | CAT活性 CAT activity/(nmol·ming-1 FW) | ||||||||
1 d | 3 d | 10 d | 1 d | 3 d | 10 d | 1 d | 3 d | 10 d | |||
CK1 | 276.25±1.45Ac | 251.22±4.68Aab | 116.48±2.16Be | 0.97±0.06Aj | 1.08±0.06Ah | 1.47±0.03Ah | 36.56±1.15Ah | 97.12±6.28Ae | 137.44±0.77Ac | ||
CK2 | 228.93±3.92Bf | 266.52±8.02Aa | 153.67±7.89Cd | 13.26±0.21Bc | 13.59±0.11Bd | 19.69±0.18Ab | 169.44±4.06Ab | 123.33±3.02Ad | 99.52±2.77Ae | ||
B1 | 182.60±2.51Ah | 166.91±4.14Bd | 100.81±0.93Cef | 17.27±0.28Ab | 15.01±0.11Ac | 15.20±0.06Ad | 135.48±2.56Ad | 156.37±2.69Ac | 169.88±10.02Ab | ||
B2 | 263.46±5.55Ad | 218.20±5.92Bc | 47.71±1.96Cg | 11.42±0.09Ae | 15.01±0.01Ac | 14.49±0.20Ae | 88.60±9.79Af | 190.12±5.31Ab | 44.97±4.74Ag | ||
B3 | 194.07±1.39Ag | 144.39±4.09Bef | 113.81±1.58Ce | 11.59±0.02Ae | 1.40±0.02Bh | 0.46±0.03Ci | 62.67±3.29Bg | 104.59±1.16Ade | 250.34±1.33Aa | ||
S1 | 138.94±4.78Cj | 244.26±5.91Ab | 182.71±1.40Bc | 27.52±0.21Aa | 13.39±0.11Ad | 22.48±0.33Aa | 74.08±2.07Bg | 162.97±7.28Ac | 82.40±1.46Bf | ||
S2 | 135.43±2.50Bjk | 203.64±1.48Ac | 194.32±2.93Abc | 10.18±0.01Af | 14.93±0.22Ac | 11.45±0.02Af | 37.77±1.20Ah | 187.97±3.25Ab | 118.04±12.33Ad | ||
S3 | 170.80±4.62Ai | 157.62±3.69Ade | 52.46±1.77Bg | 9.15±0.13Bg | 12.27±0.88Ae | 1.14±0.11Ch | 152.67±1.76Ac | 237.99±9.73Aa | 35.66±0.64Agh | ||
J1 | 324.82±5.37Ab | 206.41±1.93Ac | 203.54±6.87Ab | 9.51±0.42Bg | 15.39±0.28Ac | 11.86±0.42Af | 41.92±4.64Ah | 43.45±3.94Ag | 21.99±1.84Ah | ||
J2 | 71.23±1.71Bl | 210.72±4.59Ac | 166.80±12.24ABd | 3.97±0.22Ci | 21.26±0.3Aa | 17.33±0.30Bc | 34.39±2.96Bh | 119.63±13.24Ad | 146.18±5.54Ac | ||
J3 | 253.33±4.29Ade | 141.07±6.51Bf | 95.94±5.83Bf | 11.03±0.10Be | 14.7±0.05Ac | 14.85±0.08Ade | 116.66±2.55Ae | 27.31±1.01Ag | 26.24±0.46Ah | ||
C1 | 244.70±1.61Ae | 70.40±5.93Bg | 240.57±4.65Aa | 7.39±0.04Ah | 4.09±0.10Bg | 7.82±0.02Ag | 32.00±0.63Ah | 39.37±0.69Ag | 27.63±2.13Agh | ||
C2 | 125.98±2.01Bk | 261.74±7.79Aa | 85.75±5.39Bf | 11.13±0.13Be | 17.5±0.17Ab | 11.39±0.2Bf | 188.56±6.93Aa | 75.62±3.69Af | 137.03±10.10Ac | ||
C3 | 346.33±2.02Aa | 133.63±6.54Bf | / | 12.42±0.10Ad | 8.55±0.12Bf | / | 166.35±5.93Ab | 121.90±13.29Ad | / |
表2
铅胁迫下不同处理对格木幼苗渗透调节物质含量的影响"
处理 Treatment | PRO含量 PRO content/(μg·g-1) | SP含量 SP content/(mg·g-1) | SS含量 SS content/(mg·g-1) | ||||||||
1 d | 3 d | 10 d | 1 d | 3 d | 10 d | 1 d | 3 d | 10 d | |||
CK1 | 155.02±6.80Bf | 73.66±1.46Bg | 299.84±17.78Aa | 10.09±0.08Bc | 12.82±0.19Ac | 10.07±0.15Bc | 5.77±0.31Abc | 6.09±0.39Ca | 7.50±0.10Ba | ||
CK2 | 89.02±2.57Ah | 52.33±1.41Ah | 100.30±3.61Ae | 7.29±0.53Bfg | 10.40±0.34Ae | 8.44±0.24Bd | 6.41±0.31Aa | 5.14±0.17Abcd | 6.71±0.06Ab | ||
B1 | 86.12±2.35Ah | 96.50±3.13Af | 117.75±3.66Ade | 10.27±0.35Ac | 8.93±0.16Bf | 10.21±0.24Ac | 4.45±0.10Aef | 5.61±0.24Aab | 5.50±0.29Acd | ||
B2 | 176.03±7.64Ade | 190.19±2.96Aab | 198.82±0.93Ab | 10.41±0.23Ac | 11.10±0.24Ad | 12.17±0.68Ab | 4.85±0.11Adef | 2.35±0.05Bh | 5.37±0.05Ad | ||
B3 | 215.24±11.57Ac | 151.97±2.73Bc | 145.05±5.15Bc | 18.05±0.32Aa | 13.48±0.23Bc | 13.39±0.49Ba | 4.53±0.22Aef | 4.69±0.11Acde | 5.26±0.15Ad | ||
S1 | 129.42±1.67Bg | 99.06±0.36Cf | 153.68±2.23Ac | 11.94±0.22Ab | 8.24±0.07Bg | 6.70±0.05Ce | 4.47±0.16Aef | 3.65±0.14Ag | 4.50±0.11Ae | ||
S2 | 102.34±1.96Bh | 119.90±1.85ABe | 125.43±2.73Ad | 9.78±0.19Acd | 9.91±0.12Ae | 8.74±0.17Bd | 4.97±0.23Ade | 3.82±0.19Afg | 4.37±0.07Aef | ||
S3 | 192.46±0.68Ad | 111.36±2.26Be | 110.57±5.12Bde | 10.54±0.32Cc | 15.00±0.33Ab | 12.30±0.24Bb | 5.89±0.29Aab | 5.86±0.54Aab | 3.97±0.23Afg | ||
J1 | 159.24±3.30Aef | 138.54±3.63Ad | 162.73±4.79Ac | 6.49±0.32Agh | 5.31±0.25Bi | 5.85±0.07ABe | 4.28±0.07Af | 5.75±0.19Aab | 3.88±0.29Afg | ||
J2 | 304.25±2.28Aa | 197.04±6.62Ba | 120.53±8.70Cd | 8.40±0.62Be | 7.53±0.25Bh | 10.60±0.26Ac | 4.28±0.24Af | 3.62±0.16Ag | 5.89±0.08Ac | ||
J3 | 82.89±2.51Ah | 75.99±3.50ABg | 67.84±1.23Bf | 8.17±0.48Aef | 9.09±0.09Af | 6.65±0.11Be | 5.23±0.20Acd | 5.43±0.17Aabc | 3.74±0.11Ag | ||
C1 | 81.15±2.39Ah | 66.71±0.98Ag | 71.00±5.04Af | 8.49±0.11Be | 15.77±0.23Aa | 8.27±0.14Bd | 4.94±0.17Adef | 3.97±0.43Aefg | 3.64±0.17Ag | ||
C2 | 94.04±1.94Bh | 180.38±3.68Ab | 156.67±1.25Ac | 8.94±0.22Bde | 14.84±0.35Ab | 8.19±0.16Bd | 5.32±0.08Abcd | 4.47±0.12Adef | 3.92±0.03Afg | ||
C3 | 243.04±17.46Ab | 116.88±6.88Be | / | 5.70±0.03Bh | 7.31±0.25Ah | / | 3.66±0.07Ag | 4.56±0.18Adef | / |
表3
铅胁迫下不同处理对格木幼苗细胞膜透性及SPAD值的影响"
处理 Treatment | MDA含量 MDA content/(nmol·g-1) | 相对电导率 RC(%) | SPAD | ||||||||
1 d | 3 d | 10 d | 1 d | 3 d | 10 d | 1 d | 3 d | 10 d | |||
CK1 | 44.04±0.45Aabc | 41.20±2.75Ade | 34.09±2.62Ac | 9.27±0.44Ae | 7.99±0.43Ah | 8.85±0.32Ah | 29.87±0.20Ac | 31.45±0.37Aa | 24.73±0.36Bde | ||
CK2 | 41.04±4.04Cc | 52.92±1.18Bc | 72.12±2.35Aa | 6.29±0.24Ag | 8.62±0.17Agh | 10.24±0.31Aef | 37.93±0.62Aa | 16.68±0.45Cg | 21.07±0.30Bg | ||
B1 | 15.33±1.25Bfg | 35.21±0.97Aef | 26.60±0.52ABd | 7.64±0.17Af | 8.27±0.06Ah | 9.19±0.31Agh | 19.42±0.63Afg | 23.28±0.66Ade | 22.45±0.72Afg | ||
B2 | 21.66±2.01Bf | 47.08±2.28Acd | 37.43±0.69Ac | 8.09±0.18Af | 8.38±0.24Ah | 7.42±0.21Ai | 22.87±0.47Ae | 13.88±0.43Bh | 18.38±0.38ABh | ||
B3 | 13.87±0.30Bg | 47.16±3.91Acd | 38.36±2.13Ac | 8.06±0.53Af | 9.18±0.23Afg | 8.65±0.30Ah | 23.93±1.08Ae | 20.12±0.51Af | 24.30±0.81Aef | ||
S1 | 50.62±2.98Aa | 54.45±1.70Abc | 61.27±2.09Ab | 7.65±0.28Bf | 9.49±0.15ABf | 14.46±0.53Ab | 38.10±1.60Aa | 23.08±1.08Ade | 24.18±0.87Aef | ||
S2 | 37.73±1.26Acd | 26.93±0.20Agh | 24.66±0.22Ad | 10.14±0.43Ae | 12.31±0.47Ad | 9.82±0.12Afg | 22.85±0.59Ae | 28.48±0.46Abc | 27.23±1.39Ac | ||
S3 | 28.20±0.85Be | 33.12±0.44Afg | 28.43±0.87Bd | 9.59±0.23Ae | 12.47±0.26Acd | 9.55±0.19Afgh | 17.60±0.77Ag | 27.68±0.44Ac | 27.12±0.45Ac | ||
J1 | 32.86±0.88Ade | 48.55±0.41Afg | 17.64±1.48Be | 9.85±0.09Ae | 13.16±0.08Ac | 10.95±0.14Ade | 30.25±0.69Ac | 30.63±1.51Ac | 30.00±0.64Ab | ||
J2 | 42.44±3.01Abc | 34.86±0.54Aef | 36.25±1.86Ac | 11.03±0.33Ad | 11.95±0.16Ade | 15.99±0.28Aa | 27.35±1.17Ad | 22.35±1.02Ae | 22.53±0.51Aefg | ||
J3 | 32.53±1.20Bde | 77.72±3.10Aa | 26.04±1.14Bd | 14.22±0.25Ac | 11.23±0.20Ae | 14.08±0.14Ab | 23.80±0.43Ae | 24.25±0.67Ade | 26.47±0.70Acd | ||
C1 | 44.01±4.84Babc | 61.24±5.42ABb | 76.95±2.24Aa | 7.31±0.17Af | 7.95±0.21Ah | 11.19±0.10Ad | 34.85±1.13Ab | 25.27±0.47Bd | 32.92±0.48Aa | ||
C2 | 33.25±1.21Ade | 41.17±2.03Ade | 26.01±2.85Ad | 15.54±0.18Ab | 14.36±0.29Ab | 12.78±0.43Ac | 23.85±0.49Ae | 23.72±0.94Ade | 23.18±0.98Aefg | ||
C3 | 49.34±0.72Aab | 23.18±1.39Bh | / | 20.64±0.40Aa | 15.73±0.32Ba | / | 20.10±0.63ABf | 23.05±0.86Ade | 15.33±0.38Bi |
表4
铅胁迫下不同处理的格木幼苗的各项生理指标的隶属值及其综合评价"
处理 Treatment | SOD活性 SOD activity | POD活性 POD activity | CAT活性 CAT activity | PRO含量 PRO content | SP含量 SP content | SS含量 SS content | MDA含量 MDA content | 相对电导率 RC | SPAD值 SPAD value | 综合评价值 Overview | 排序 Ranking |
CK2 | 0.523 6 | 0.555 3 | 0.516 6 | 0.443 4 | 0.412 8 | 0.398 4 | 0.418 2 | 0.525 6 | 0.602 1 | 0.488 4 | 7 |
B1 | 0.434 4 | 0.505 2 | 0.530 4 | 0.478 0 | 0.467 1 | 0.548 6 | 0.532 7 | 0.515 2 | 0.482 9 | 0.499 4 | 3 |
B2 | 0.495 7 | 0.442 6 | 0.391 6 | 0.428 9 | 0.548 2 | 0.489 7 | 0.522 3 | 0.625 8 | 0.489 1 | 0.492 7 | 6 |
B3 | 0.433 3 | 0.570 8 | 0.442 4 | 0.468 3 | 0.505 4 | 0.375 7 | 0.463 8 | 0.525 8 | 0.520 7 | 0.478 5 | 9 |
S1 | 0.410 9 | 0.497 1 | 0.494 4 | 0.527 0 | 0.576 6 | 0.507 4 | 0.436 4 | 0.469 2 | 0.382 8 | 0.478 0 | 10 |
S2 | 0.495 0 | 0.421 4 | 0.475 1 | 0.558 8 | 0.384 4 | 0.468 3 | 0.443 0 | 0.432 6 | 0.515 3 | 0.466 0 | 11 |
S3 | 0.424 3 | 0.467 6 | 0.452 2 | 0.479 8 | 0.456 8 | 0.474 6 | 0.603 7 | 0.469 3 | 0.484 9 | 0.479 2 | 8 |
J1 | 0.450 4 | 0.528 3 | 0.455 2 | 0.498 0 | 0.560 6 | 0.509 6 | 0.446 0 | 0.436 4 | 0.568 8 | 0.494 8 | 5 |
J2 | 0.495 4 | 0.377 9 | 0.404 7 | 0.660 7 | 0.566 2 | 0.496 6 | 0.429 6 | 0.608 2 | 0.552 7 | 0.510 2 | 1 |
J3 | 0.459 1 | 0.474 8 | 0.569 9 | 0.461 6 | 0.480 3 | 0.371 4 | 0.467 3 | 0.460 5 | 0.447 4 | 0.465 8 | 12 |
C1 | 0.539 0 | 0.495 2 | 0.497 0 | 0.623 9 | 0.556 5 | 0.360 4 | 0.472 4 | 0.446 2 | 0.473 9 | 0.496 0 | 4 |
C2 | 0.556 1 | 0.486 6 | 0.440 2 | 0.488 9 | 0.548 5 | 0.565 0 | 0.498 9 | 0.506 9 | 0.454 2 | 0.505 0 | 2 |
C3 | 0.489 0 | 0.474 6 | 0.399 6 | 0.468 0 | 0.455 6 | 0.484 2 | 0.526 8 | 0.415 2 | 0.449 9 | 0.462 5 | 13 |
表5
铅胁迫下格木幼苗生理指标的相关性分析①"
生理指标 Physiological index | SOD | POD | CAT | PRO | SP | SS | MDA | 相对电导率 RC | SPAD |
SOD活性SOD activity | 1.000 | ||||||||
POD活性POD activity | -0.049 | 1.000 | |||||||
CAT活性CAT activity | 0.149* | -0. 176* | 1.000 | ||||||
PRO含量PRO content | 0.394** | -0.225** | 0.202** | 1.000 | |||||
SP含量SP content | 0.027 | -0.219** | 0.076 | 0.205** | 1.000 | ||||
SS含量SS content | 0.374** | -0.374** | 0.234** | 0.438** | 0.324** | 1.000 | |||
MDA含量MDA content | 0.012 | -0.084 | 0.086 | 0.011 | -0.106 | 0.090 | 1.000 | ||
相对电导率RC | 0.135 | 0.042 | 0.130 | 0.335** | -0.048 | 0.158* | 0.140* | 1.000 | |
SPAD | 0.044 | -0.029 | -0.112 | 0.201** | -0.016 | 0.132 | 0.105 | 0.230** | 1.000 |
曹莹, 黄瑞冬, 曹志强. 铅胁迫对玉米生理生化特性的影响. 玉米科学, 2005, 13 (3): 61- 64.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-0906.2005.03.020 |
|
Cao Y , Huang R D , Cao Z Q . Effects of Pb stress on the physiological and biochemical traits of maize. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2005, 13 (3): 61- 64.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-0906.2005.03.020 |
|
常云霞, 徐克东, 刘君锋, 等. 外源水杨酸对Pb2+胁迫下玉米幼苗生理特性的影响. 安全与环境学报, 2015, 15 (5): 386- 389. | |
Chang Y X , Xu K D , Liu J F , et al. Effect of exogenous salicylic acid on the physiological traits of maize seedlings under Pb2+stress. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2015, 15 (5): 386- 389. | |
段德超, 于明革, 施积炎. 植物对铅的吸收、转运、累积和解毒机制研究进展. 应用生态学报, 2014, 25 (1): 287- 296. | |
Duan D C , Yu M G , Shi J Y . Research advances in uptake, translocation, accumulation and detoxification of Pb in plants. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2014, 25 (1): 287- 296. | |
段小华, 邓泽元, 宾金华. 茉莉酸甲酯对水稻幼苗抗冷性的影响. 植物生理学通讯, 2009, 45 (9): 881- 884. | |
Duan X H , Deng Z Y , Bin J H . Effects of methyl jasmonate on cold resistance of rice (Oryza sativa L. ) seedlings. Plant Physiology Communications, 2009, 45 (9): 881- 884. | |
谷文英, 李兴正, 祈新梅, 等. 外源一氧化氮对盐胁迫下菊苣生长及渗透调节物质的影响. 生态学杂志, 2013, 32 (3): 615- 620. | |
Gu W Y , Li X Z , Qi X M , et al. Effects of exogenous nitric oxide on the growth and osmotic regulation substances of Cichorium intybus L. under salt stress. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2013, 32 (3): 615- 620. | |
黄忠良, 郭贵仲, 张祝平. 渐危植物格木的濒危机制及其繁殖特性的研究. 生态学报, 1997, 17 (6): 671- 676. | |
Huang Z L , Guo G Z , Zhang Z P . A Study about endangered mechanism of Erythrophleum fordii. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 1997, 17 (6): 671- 676. | |
李合生. 植物生理生化实验原理和技术. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2000: 134- 137. | |
Li H S . Principles and techniques of plant physiological and biochemical experiments. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2000: 134- 137. | |
李洁, 武杭菊, 胡景江, 等. 干旱-低温交叉逆境下小麦渗透调节能力的变化与交叉适应的关系. 干旱地区农业研究, 2009, 27 (6): 149- 153. | |
Li J , Wu H J , Hu J J , et al. Relationship between changes of osmotic adjustment ability of wheat under drought and cold cross-stress and cross-adaptation. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2009, 27 (6): 149- 153. | |
李美如, 刘鸿先, 王以柔, 等. 钙对水稻幼苗抗冷性的影响. 植物生理学报, 1996, 22 (4): 379- 384. | |
Li M R , Liu H X , Wang Y R , et al. Effect of calcium on cold-resistance of rice seedlings. Acta Phytophysiologica Sinica, 1996, 22 (4): 379- 384. | |
刘慧, 经怀江, 周鑫, 等. 甜菜碱对铅胁迫下玉米幼苗生理特性的影响. 阜阳师范学院学报: 自然科学版, 2017, 34 (1): 46- 50. | |
Liu H , Jing H J , Zhou X , et al. Effects of betaine on physiological characteristics of maize seedlings under Pb stress. Journal of Fuyang Normal University: Natural Science, 2017, 34 (1): 46- 50. | |
刘铃, 武小龙, 诸葛强. 植物应答非生物胁迫信号传导研究进展. 分子植物育种, 2018, 16 (2): 614- 625. | |
Liu L , Wu X L , Zhuge Q . Research progress of abiotic stress responsive signal pathway in plant. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2018, 16 (2): 614- 625. | |
卢军, 邢小军, 朱利泉, 等. 高温干旱共胁迫下外源甜菜碱和CaCl2对烟草生理响应的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2011, 17 (6): 1437- 1443. | |
Lu J , Xing X J , Zhu L Q , et al. Effects of exogenous glycine betaine and CaCl2 on physiological responses of tobacco plants under stresses of heat and drought. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2011, 17 (6): 1437- 1443. | |
孟长军, 郭成圆, 张旸. 水杨酸处理对盐胁迫下喜树幼苗光合特性的影响. 陕西农业科学, 2018, 64 (9): 35- 38.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0488-5368.2018.09.011 |
|
Meng C J , Guo C Y , Zhang Y . Effects of salicylic acid on photosynthetic characteristics of Camptotheca acuminata seedlings under salt stress. Shaanxi Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 64 (9): 35- 38.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0488-5368.2018.09.011 |
|
石贵玉, 李佳枚, 韦颖, 等. 钙对镉胁迫下生菜幼苗生长和生理的影响. 浙江农业科学, 2010, 48 (4): 717- 720.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0528-9017.2010.04.007 |
|
Shi G Y , Li J M , Wei Y , et al. Effects of calcium on the growth and physiology of Lactuca sativa seedlings under cadmium stress. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2010, 48 (4): 717- 720.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0528-9017.2010.04.007 |
|
史树德, 孙亚卿, 魏磊. 植物生理学实验指导. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2011: 126- 146. | |
Shi S D , Sun Y Q , Wei L . Experiment guide for plant physiology. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House, 2011: 126- 146. | |
宋勤飞, 樊卫国, 刘国琴, 等. 铅在番茄中的积累及对其生长和生理的影响. 农业环境科学学报, 2006, 25 (s1): 87- 91. | |
Song Q F , Fan W G , Liu G Q , et al. Accumulation of lead(Pb) and its effects on growth and physiological status in tomato. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2006, 25 (s1): 87- 91. | |
王芳, 李永生, 王汉宁, 等. 钙对铅胁迫下玉米幼苗生长及生理特性的影响. 水土保持学报, 2016, 30 (3): 202- 207. | |
Wang F , Li Y S , Wang H N , et al. Effect calcium on growth and physiological characteristics of maize seedling under lead stress. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016, 30 (3): 202- 207. | |
王三根, 苍晶. 植物生理生化. 第三版 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2015: 381- 408. | |
Wang S G , Cang J . Plant physiological biochemical. Third Edition Beijing: China Agricultural Press, 2015: 381- 408. | |
杨华庚, 颜速亮, 陈慧娟, 等. 高温胁迫下外源茉莉酸甲酯、钙和水杨酸对蝴蝶兰幼苗耐热性的影响. 中国农学通报, 2011, 27 (28): 150- 157. | |
Yang H G , Yan S L , Chen H J , et al. Effect of exogenous methyl jasmonate, calcium and salicylic acid on the heat tolerance in Phalaenopsis seedlings under high temperature stress. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2011, 27 (28): 150- 157. | |
姚伟卿, 朱月琪. 甜菜碱对植物重金属胁迫抗性影响的研究进展. 四川环境, 2019, 38 (1): 150- 155. | |
Yao W Q , Zhu Y Q . Research progress on the effects of glycine betanie on plant resistance to heavy metal stress. Sichuan Environment, 2019, 38 (1): 150- 155. | |
赵腾飞, 刘颖, 王尔美, 等. 外源钙离子对铅胁迫下小麦膜脂过氧化和根系活力的影响. 安徽农业大学学报, 2017, 44 (3): 508- 512. | |
Zhao T F , Liu Y , Wang E M , et al. Effects of exogenous Ca2+ on membrane lipid peroxidation and root activity of wheat under lead stress. Journal of Anhui Agricultural University, 2017, 44 (3): 508- 512. | |
周芙蓉, 王进鑫, 杨楠, 等. 干旱和铅交互作用对侧柏幼苗生长及抗氧化酶活性的影响. 林业科学, 2013, 49 (6): 172- 177. | |
Zhou F R , Wang J X , Yang N , et al. Interaction of drought and Pb on growth and antioxidant enzyme. activities of Platycladus orientalis seedlings. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2013, 49 (6): 172- 177. | |
邹文桐, 项雷文, 刘美华. 水杨酸对铅镉复合胁迫下芥菜子叶生理代谢的影响. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2012, 47 (4): 48- 52.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4315.2012.04.009 |
|
Zou W T , Xiang L W , Liu M H . Effects of salicylic acid on physiological metabolism of Brassica juncea under combined Pb and Cd stress. Journal of Gansu Agricultural University, 2012, 47 (4): 48- 52.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4315.2012.04.009 |
|
左彬彬, 张彦萍, 刘海河, 等. 茉莉酸甲酯对厚皮甜瓜幼苗耐冷性的影响. 河北农业大学学报, 2018, 41 (5): 75- 79. | |
Zuo B B , Zhang Y P , Liu H H , et al. Effects of methyl jasmonate on chilling resistance of muskmelon seedlings. Journal of Hebei Agricultural University, 2018, 41 (5): 75- 79. | |
Bali S , Kaur P , Kohli S K , et al. Jasmonic acid induced changes in physio-biochemical attributes and ascorbate-glutathione pathway in Lycopersicon esculentum under lead stress at different growth stages. Science of The Total Environment, 2018, 645, 1344- 1360.
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.164 |
|
Bharwana S A , Ali S , Farooq M A , et al. Glycine betaine-induced lead toxicity tolerance related to elevated photosynthesis, antioxidant enzymes suppressed lead uptake and oxidative stress in cotton. Turkish Journal of Botany, 2014, 38 (15): 281- 292. | |
Ciarmiello L F , Woodrow P , Fuggi A , et al. Plant genes for abiotic stress. Abiotic Stress in Plants-Mechanisms and Adaptations, 2011, 283- 308. | |
Kohli S K , Handa N , Sharma A , et al. Interaction of 24-epibrassinolide and salicylic acid regulates pigment contents, antioxidative defense responses, and gene expression in Brassica juncea L. seedlings under Pb stress. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2018, 25 (15): 15159- 15173.
doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-1742-7 |
|
Kosobrukhov A , Knyazeva I , Mudrik V . Plantago major plants responses to increase content of lead in soil: growth and photosynthesis. Plant Growth Regulation, 2004, 42 (2): 145- 151.
doi: 10.1023/B:GROW.0000017490.59607.6b |
|
Koster K L . Glass formation and desiccation tolerance in seeds. Plant Physiology, 1991, 96 (1): 302- 304.
doi: 10.1104/pp.96.1.302 |
|
Küpper H . Lead toxicity in plants. Metal Ions in Life Sciences, 2017, 17 (1): 491- 500. | |
Küpper H , Küpper F , Spiller M . Environmental relevance of heavy metal-substituted chlorophylls using the example of water plants. Journal of Experimental Botany, 1996, 47 (295): 259- 266. | |
Lehmann J , Atzorn R , Brückner C , et al. Accumulation of jasmonate, abscisic acid, specific transcripts and proteins in osmotically stressed barley leaf segments. Planta, 1995, 197 (1): 156- 162.
doi: 10.1007/BF00239952 |
|
Li N , Yu F , Yu S S . Triterpenoids form Erythrophleum fordii. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology, 2004, 46 (3): 371- 374. | |
Lou Y H , Yang Y , Hu L X , et al. Exogenous glycinebetaine alleviates the detrimental effect of Cd stress on perennial ryegrass. Ecotoxicology, 2015, 24 (6): 1330- 1340.
doi: 10.1007/s10646-015-1508-7 |
|
Raskin I . Role of salicylic acid in plants. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology, 1992, 43 (1): 439- 463.
doi: 10.1146/annurev.pp.43.060192.002255 |
|
Shao G S , Chen M X , Wang W X , et al. The effect of salinity pretreatment on Cd accumulation and Cd-induced stress in BADH-transgenic and nontransgenic rice seedlings. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, 2008, 27 (3): 205- 210.
doi: 10.1007/s00344-008-9047-6 |
|
Taiz L , Zeiger E . Plant physiology. Fifth Edition Sinauer Associates, 2010: 597- 616. |
[1] | 孙明升,胡颖,陈旋,罗群凤,杨章旗. 外源调节物质对干旱胁迫下格木幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2020, 56(10): 165-172. |
[2] | 王怡霖, 王卫锋, 张芸香, 常淑君, 郭晋平. 碧玉杨叶形态结构与生理特性对干旱的响应[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(4): 42-50. |
[3] | 李洪果, 陈达镇, 许靖诗, 刘光金, 庞晓东, 叶金辉, 莫小文, 谌红辉. 濒危植物格木天然种群的表型多样性及变异[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(4): 69-83. |
[4] | 姚虹宇, 刘亚敏, 张盛楠, 刘玉民, 周文颖, 王针针. 外源柠檬酸对铝胁迫下马尾松生理特性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(7): 155-164. |
[5] | 姜顺邦, 韦小丽. 供水量对花榈木苗期耗水、生长和生理的影响及灌溉制度优化[J]. 林业科学, 2016, 52(10): 22-30. |
[6] | 陶巧静, 吴月燕, 付涛, 项锡娜, 李波. 弱光胁迫对西洋杜鹃生理特性和叶片超微结构的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2015, 51(3): 84-92. |
[7] | 叶松涛, 杜旭华, 宋帅杰, 李黎, 卢杨, 应叶青. 水杨酸对干旱胁迫下毛竹实生苗生理生化特征的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2015, 51(11): 25-31. |
[8] | 凌骅, 黄坚钦, 温国胜, 王正加, 杨先裕, 袁紫倩, 郑超超, 沈一凡. 5种美国山核桃苗叶片光合生理特性比较[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(8): 174-178. |
[9] | 赵志刚, 郭俊杰, 曾杰, 徐建民. 广西大明山格木种群的空间分布格局与数量动态特征[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(10): 1-7. |
[10] | 周芙蓉, 王进鑫, 杨楠, 张青, 邹朋. 干旱和铅交互作用对侧柏幼苗生长及抗氧化酶活性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2013, 49(6): 172-177. |
[11] | 林晓倩;张健;杨万勤;吴福忠;刘洋;生俊丹. 3种土壤类型下铅胁迫对巨桉幼苗的影响[J]. , 2013, 49(1): 1-6. |
[12] | 黄小辉;刘芸;李佳杏;熊兴政;尹小华;陈阳;秦俭;黄先智;杜英武. 水分胁迫对三峡库区消落带桑树幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2012, 48(12): 122-127. |
[13] | 杨梅;吴幼媚;黄寿先;黄晓露. 不同桉树优良无性系幼苗对酸铝的抗性生理响应差异[J]. 林业科学, 2011, 47(6): 181-187. |
[14] | 张志坚;高健;蔡春菊;范少辉. 铅胁迫下菲白竹的矿质营养吸收和分配[J]. 林业科学, 2011, 47(1): 153-157. |
[15] | 林霞;郑坚;刘洪见;钱仁卷;王金旺. 不同基质对无柄小叶榕容器苗生长和叶片生理特性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2010, 46(8): 62-70. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||