不同百脉根品系茎解剖结构特征分析与抗旱性评价

doi:10.12190/j.issn.2096-1197.2021.04.11

北方农业学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (4): 70-75.doi: 10.12190/j.issn.2096-1197.2021.04.11

• 分子生物学·生理生化 • 上一篇下一篇

不同百脉根品系茎解剖结构特征分析与抗旱性评价

李鸿雁¹, 李悦煊², 扈顺³, 敦惠霞³

1.中国农业科学院草原研究所/农业农村部沙尔沁牧草资源重点野外科学观测试验站,内蒙古呼和浩特 010010;
2.内蒙古农业大学材料科学与艺术设计学院,内蒙古呼和浩特 010018;
3.内蒙古自治区农牧业科学院,内蒙古呼和浩特 010031

收稿日期:2021-04-08 出版日期:2021-08-20 发布日期:2021-10-28
通讯作者: 敦惠霞（1962—）,女,编审,学士,主要从事农业信息管理与期刊出版工作。
作者简介:李鸿雁（1964—）,女,研究员,博士,主要从事牧草种质资源的研究工作。
基金资助:
农业农村部作物种质资源保护项目（2020NWB037）

Analysis of stem anatomical structure and evaluation of drought resistance of different strains of Lotus corniculatus

LI Hongyan¹, LI Yuexuan², HU Shun³, DUN Huixia³

1. Institute of Grassland,Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Shaerqin Key Wild Scientific Monitoring Station For Forage Resources,Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs,Hohhot 010010,China;
2. College of Material Science and Art Design,Inner Mongolia Agricultural University,Hohhot 010018,China;
3. Inner Mongolia Academy of Agricultural and Animal Husbandry Sciences,Hohhot 010031,China

Received:2021-04-08 Online:2021-08-20 Published:2021-10-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 【目的】比较不同百脉根品系的抗旱性,筛选出抗旱性强的品系。【方法】采用石蜡切片法观察4 个百脉根品系（B1、B2、B3、B4）茎解剖结构,分析其茎横切面,并测定表皮细胞厚度、皮层细胞厚度、木质部厚度、韧皮部厚度、髓直径、茎面积、导管直径、木质部与韧皮部面积8个解剖性状特征参数,并对百脉根品系茎解剖性状进行方差分析、主成分分析、相关分析及抗旱性综合评价。【结果】4 个百脉根品系茎的解剖结构基本无明显差异,横切面结构均由表皮、皮层和维管柱组成。茎解剖性状方差分析表明,变异系数最大的是木质部与韧皮部面积,最小的是韧皮部厚度;髓直径的F值最大,而韧皮部厚度的F值最小。主成分分析表明,第一主成分、第二主成分、第三主成分的特征值分别为5.089、1.219、1.032,累积贡献率达到91.743 %,已经超过85%,说明4个百脉根品系的前 3 个主成分因子能概括8个茎解剖性状的主要信息。相关分析表明,皮层细胞厚度与木质部厚度、髓直径、茎面积呈极显著正相关（P<0.01）,相关系数分别为0.970、0.921、0.983;木质部厚度与髓直径、茎面积呈极显著正相关（P<0.01）,相关系数分别为0.929、0.964;髓直径与茎面积呈极显著正相关（P<0.01）,相关系数为0.958。隶属函数综合分析表明,4个百脉根品系抗旱性排序为B1>B3>B4>B2。【结论】8个茎解剖性状能够作为百脉根品系抗旱性比较的性状解剖指标,可以对百脉根作出较为准确的抗旱鉴定;B1品系的抗旱性较强。

关键词: 百脉根, 茎解剖结构, 抗旱性

Abstract: 【Objective】To screen the strains of Lotus corniculatus with strong drought resistance.【Methods】The stem anatomical structures of four Lotus corniculatus strains（B1,B2,B3 and B4）were observed by paraffin section,the stem cross-sections were analyzed,and eight characteristic parameters of anatomical traits were measured：epidermal cell thickness,cortical cell thickness,xylem thickness,phloem thickness,pulp diameter,stem area,vessel diameter,xylem and phloem area. Variance analysis,principal component analysis,correlation analysis and comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance were carried out.【Results】There was no significant difference in the stem anatomical structure of the four Lotus corniculatus strains. The cross-sectional structure was composed of epidermis,cortex and vascular column. The variance analysis of stem anatomical traits showed that the largest coefficient of variation was the xylem and phloem area,and the smallest was the phloem thickness. The F value of pulp diameter was the largest,while that of phloem thickness was the smallest. Principal component analysis showed that the eigenvalues of the first principal component,the second principal component and the third principal component were 5.089,1.219 and 1.032,respectively,and the cumulative contribution rate reached 91.743% which exceeded 85%,indicating that the first three principal component factors of the four Lotus corniculatus strains could summarize the main information of the eight stem anatomical traits. Correlation analysis showed that the cortical cell thickness was extremely significantly positively correlated with xylem thickness,pulp diameter and stem area（P<0.01）,and the correlation coefficients were 0.970,0.921 and 0.983,respectively. Xylem thickness was extremely significantly positively correlated with pulp diameter and stem area（P<0.01）,and the correlation coefficients were 0.929 and 0.964,respectively. There was a extremely significant positive correlation between pulp diameter and stem area（P<0.01）,and the correlation coefficient was 0.958. The comprehensive analysis of membership function showed that the drought resistance of the four Lotus corniculatus strains was B1>B3>B4>B2.【Conclusion】The eight stem anatomical traits could be used as the anatomical indexes for comparison of drought resistance of Lotus corniculatus strains,and could make more accurate drought resistance identification of Lotus corniculatus;B1 strain had stronger drought resistance.

Key words: Lotus corniculatus, Stem anatomical structure, Drought resistance

中图分类号:

S541.6

李鸿雁, 李悦煊, 扈顺, 敦惠霞. 不同百脉根品系茎解剖结构特征分析与抗旱性评价[J]. 北方农业学报, 2021, 49(4): 70-75.

LI Hongyan, LI Yuexuan, HU Shun, DUN Huixia. Analysis of stem anatomical structure and evaluation of drought resistance of different strains of Lotus corniculatus[J]. Journal of Northern Agriculture, 2021, 49(4): 70-75.

参考文献

[1] 冯雪,王彬,孙艳香.百脉根谷胱甘肽硫转移酶基因的载体构建与检测[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(29):17778-17780.
[2] HASHIGUCHI M,TANAKA H,MUGUERZA M,et al.Lotus japonicus genetic,mutant and germplasm resources[J].Current Protocols in Plant Biology,2018,3(2):e20070.
[3] PELLISSIER V,MURATET A,VERFAILLIE F,et al.Pollination success of(Lotus corniculatus L.)in an urban context[J].Acta Oecologica,2012,39:92-100.
[4] 赵丽丽,王普昶,陈超,等.高温胁迫下百脉根生理生化响应及耐热性评价[J].草业科学,2013,30(12):2018-2023.
[5] JI H L,CAI D P.The research on techniques of replenishing Lotus corniculatus to improve low-humid grassland[J].Grass-Feeding Livestock,2006(3):61-64.
[6] 张帆,李成云,吕忠蕾.白三叶与长柄百脉根不同混合比例对延边黄牛瘤胃泡沫及产气的影响[J].饲料工业,2013,34(1):43-46.
[7] SHAMIM A,RASHID A,MUHAMMAD Y A,et al.Sunflower(Helianthus annuus L.)response to drought stress at germination and seedling growth stages[J].Pakistan Journal of Botany,2009,41:647-654.
[8] SANGTARASH M H,QADERI M M,CHINNAPPA C,et al.Differential responses of two Stellaria longipes ecotypes to ultraviolet—B radiation and drought stress[J].Flora Morphology,Distribution,Functional Ecology of Plants,2009,204:593-603.
[9] CHARTZOU L K,PATSKAS A,KOFIDIS G,et al .Water stress affects leaf anatomy,gas exchange,water relations and growth of two avocado cultivars[J].Scientia Horticulturae,2002,95:39-50.
[10] 侯艳伟,贾志斌,杨持,等.皇甫川流域不同生态环境区5个共有植物种群性状特征的比较研究[J].内蒙古大学学报(自然科学版),2001,32(3):319-323.
[11] 李正理. 植物制片技术[M].2版.北京:科学出版社,1987:129-137.
[12] HENKEL P A.Physiology of plant sunder drought[J].Annual Review Plant Physiology,1964,15:363-386.
[13] FAHN A.Plant Anatomy[M].Oxford:Pergamon Press,1982:259.
[14] 周智彬,李培军.我国旱生植物的形态解剖学研究[J].干旱地区研究,2002,19(1):35-40.
[15] 陈阳,陈雅君,周阳,等.三叶草不同品种茎结构特征与抗旱性的关系[J].草地学报,2012,20(4):686-691.
[16] 胡国富,胡宝忠,姜述君,等.白三叶营养体的形态结构[J].东北农业大学学报,2002,32(2):170-174.
[17] 胡小文,王彦荣,武艳培.荒漠草原植物抗旱生理生态学研究进展[J].草业学报,2004,13(3):9-15.
[18] 金洪,韩烈保,孟庆辉,等.结缕草主要居群营养器官比较解剖学研究[J].中国草地学报,2006,28(4):11-17.
[19] 赵祥,董宽虎,张垚,等.不同居群达乌里胡枝子叶片解剖结构研究[J].草地学报,2009,17(4):445-451.
[20] 李鸿雁,李悦煊,扈顺.不同百脉根品系叶片解剖结构特征分析及抗旱性评价[J].中国草地学报,2020,42(6):37-40.

不同百脉根品系茎解剖结构特征分析与抗旱性评价

Analysis of stem anatomical structure and evaluation of drought resistance of different strains of Lotus corniculatus

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	李保成, 康文钦, 任永峰, 张德健, 李娟, 张向前, 赵志媛, 韩云飞, 张乐, 伞薪潼. 干旱对不同马铃薯品种生长和产量的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2023, 51(5): 40-50.
[2]	方敏彦, 章明, 周猛. 结缕草属植物抗旱性评价[J]. 北方农业学报, 2020, 48(6): 103-107.
[3]	李丹, 靳鲲鹏, 李小霞, 曹晋军, 韩文清, 刘永忠, 李万星. 大豆抗旱性鉴定、评价方法研究进展[J]. 北方农业学报, 2020, 48(4): 48-53.
[4]	张赛楠, 苏治军, 高聚林, 于晓芳, 王志刚, 孙继颖, 胡树平, 屈佳伟, 包海柱. 玉米自交系抗旱性评价及指标筛选[J]. 北方农业学报, 2019, 47(3): 18-25.
[5]	张雪婷;柳娜;杨长刚. 河西走廊玉米水分高效利用种质的筛选方法探讨[J]. 北方农业学报, 2019, 47(1): 68-73.
[6]	李金龙;杨德光;孙平立;平翠枝. 反复干旱对禾本科牧草品种幼苗抗旱差异的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2018, 46(2): 21-21.
[7]	孙聪;郭金丽;陈涛;李连国. 干旱胁迫下不同浓度水杨酸对葡萄赤霞珠抗旱性的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2017, 45(6): 11-11.
[8]	郭世华顾翔峰杨文耀吴宝华高志军张永虎. 谷子萌芽期抗旱性初步研究[J]. 北方农业学报, 2017, (1): 1-1.
[9]	任永峰赵沛义李振华刘建设门果桃贾有余. 不同灌水处理对糜子生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 北方农业学报, 2015, 43(5): 19-19.
[10]	郭富国杨文耀贾利敏贾明罗中旺牛素清. 内蒙古干旱区农作物种质资源抗旱性综合评价[J]. 北方农业学报, 2015, 43(4): 1-1.
[11]	白泽华李小燕李连国王欣玉. 不同立地条件下欧李的抗旱性研究[J]. 北方农业学报, 2015, 43(3): 7-7.
[12]	高卿. 不同燕麦品种抗旱生态适应性研究[J]. 北方农业学报, 2014, (6): 17-17.
[13]	任永峰赵举路战远赵沛义张永平. 马铃薯种子播前抗旱处理技术研究[J]. 北方农业学报, 2013, (4): 25-25.
[14]	智广俊. 麦类作物抗旱性育种经验点滴[J]. 北方农业学报, 2012, (6): 118-118.
[15]	杨子光冀天会郭军伟孟丽梅张珂孙军伟. 小麦苗期抗旱性鉴定研究进展[J]. 北方农业学报, 2009, (5): 29-29.