土壤含水量对苜蓿和沙棘气孔导度与叶水势的影响

doi:10.16843/j.sswc.2019.02.005

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要苜蓿和沙棘是西北干旱荒漠区重要的植物，然而，二者的节水和抗旱机理仍有不被理解之处。为揭示植物叶片气孔导度（G_s）、叶水势（ψ_L）对水分胁迫的响应规律，将苗期苜蓿与沙棘分别进行了水分胁迫的盆栽试验，根据土壤含水量占田间持水量的比例设置了充分供水（CK）、轻度水分胁迫（LD）、中度水分胁迫（MD）和重度水分胁迫（HD）4个处理。结果表明：在不同胁迫梯度下，沙棘G_s与ψ_L日变化规律一致，分别为近"M"和近"V"型曲线；而苜蓿的日变化规律不一致。两种植物的G_s与ψ_L日平均值均随水分胁迫程度的加剧而降低，且沙棘G_s、ψ_L日均值均大于苜蓿。2种植物G_s、ψ_L与叶片相对湿度（RH_L）均呈显著正相关关系。沙棘G_s与光合有效辐射（PAR）呈显著的负二次相关关系，且G_s最大值为（CK：432.02，LD：384.32，MD：335.94，HD：307.73 mmol/（m²·s））；苜蓿G_s仅在CK时与PAR呈显著正相关关系，而在胁迫处理下与PAR无显著相关性。不同水分条件下沙棘ψ_L与叶片温度（T_L）均呈显著负相关关系，而苜蓿则均无显著相关性。沙棘G_s、ψ_L随RH_L、T_L、PAR变化率比苜蓿大87%~203%。综上，沙棘对干旱胁迫环境有更强适应性，苜蓿对水分胁迫的响应规律更为复杂。本研究有助于深入了解沙棘与苜蓿苗期对干旱胁迫环境的适应性，为荒漠地区植被恢复建设提供技术支撑。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	陈振
	元慕田
	曹琪琪
	刘涛
	肖辉杰

关键词 ：苜蓿, 沙棘, 气孔导度, 叶片水势, 响应规律

Abstract：[Background] Medicago sativa and Hippophae rhamnoides are two of most important plants in the arid desert areas of northwest China. However, the mechanisms of water-saving and drought resistance of M. sativa and H. rhamnoides remain poorly understood, and the corresponding techniques need to be further studied.[Methods] The potted trials of water stress were carried out to understand the response mechanisms of stomatal conductance (G_s) and leaf water potential (ψ_L) to water stress for M. sativa and H. rhamnoides at seedling stage. Sufficient water supply (CK), light water stress (LD), moderate water stress (MD), and severe water stress (HD) were set up according to the percentages of soil water contents in field moisture capacity.[Results] Under different stress gradients, the diurnal variation of G_s and ψ_L for H. rhamnoides was similar with M-shaped and V-shaped curve, respectively, while the counterparts of M. sativa was different. The daily average G_s of H. rhamnoides was higher than that of M. sativa. And the average of G_s and ψ_L of two plants decreased with the increase of water stress. The correlation between G_s, ψ_L, and relative humidity (RH_L) were significantly positively correlated for two plants. The G_s of H. rhamnoides increased at first and then decreased with the increase of photosynthetic active radiation (PAR). The G_s of M. sativa increased with the increase of PAR only when sufficient water was supplied. However, there was no correlation between G_s and PAR under stress. The ψ_L and leaf temperature (T_L) of H. rhamnoides were significantly correlated with different water stress treatments, but not for M. sativa. The G_s and ψ_L of H. rhamnoides were 87%~203% higher than that of M. sativa with the change of RH_L, T_L, and PAR. Therefore, the response of H. rhamnoides to meteorological factors was more sensitive than M. sativa.[Conclusions] It is more adaptable for H. rhamnoides to drought stress environment, while the response mechanism of M. sativa to water stress is more complicated. This study will help to understand the mechanism of H. rhamnoides and M. sativa adapting to drought stress environment at seedling stage and provide a theoretical support for vegetation restoration in desert areas.

Key words： Medicago sativa Hippophae rhamnoides stomatal conductance leaf water potential response mechanism

收稿日期: 2018-06-20

PACS:

Q945.79

基金资助:国家人力资源和社会保障部留学人员科技活动项目择优资助项目

通讯作者: 肖辉杰(1978-),男,博士,副教授。主要研究方向:水土保持与林业生态工程。E-mail:herr_xiao@hotmail.com E-mail: herr_xiao@hotmail.com

作者简介: 陈振(1983-),男,硕士,助理研究员。主要研究方向:水土保持与森林生态。E-mail:soilandwater2018@sohu.com

引用本文:

陈振¹, 元慕田², 曹琪琪², 刘涛², 肖辉杰². 土壤含水量对苜蓿和沙棘气孔导度与叶水势的影响[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2019, 17(2): 37-43.
CHEN Zhen, YUAN Mutian, CAO Qiqi, LIU Tao, XIAO Huijie. Effects of soil water content on stomatal conductance and leaf water potential of Medicago sativa and Hippophae rhamnoides. SSWC, 2019, 17(2): 37-43.

链接本文:

http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jweb_stbc/CN/10.16843/j.sswc.2019.02.005 或 http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jweb_stbc/CN/Y2019/V17/I2/37

[1]	王庆锁. 我国中西部干旱区苜蓿产业化发展的优势及其在生态环境建设中的作用[J]. 农业科技通讯, 2000(11):23. WANG Qingsuo. Advantages of Medicago sativa Linn industrialization in arid areas of central and western China and its role in ecological environment construction[J]. Agricultural Science and Technology Communication, 2000(11):23.
[2]	李江波. 发展沙棘产业对宁夏生态、经济、社会影响研究[J]. 宁夏农林科技, 2016, 57(1):15. LI Jiangbo. Study on the ecological, economic and social impact of Hippophae rhamnoides Linn industry development in Ningxia[J]. Ningxia Journal of Agriculture and Forestry Science and Technology, 2016, 57(1):15.
[3]	罗永忠, 成自勇. 水分胁迫对紫花苜蓿叶水势、蒸腾速率和气孔导度的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2011, 19(2):215. LUO Yongzhong, CHENG Ziyong. Impact of water stress on leaf water potential, transpiration rate (Tr) and stomatal conductance (Gs) of Medicago sativa Linn[J]. Acta Agrestia Simica, 2011, 19(2):215.
[4]	袁国富, 庄伟, 罗毅. 冬小麦叶片气孔导度模型水分响应函数的参数化[J]. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(5):463. YUAN Guofu, ZHUANG Wei, LUO Yi. Parameterization of water response functions in leaf stomatal conductance model for winter wheat[J].Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2012, 36(5):463.
[5]	郭冰寒, 王若水, 肖辉杰. 沙棘苗期叶水势与气孔导度对水分胁迫的响应[J]. 核农学报, 2018, 32(3):0609. GUO Binghan, WANG Ruoshui, XIAO Huijie. Response of leaf water potential and stomatal conductance of Sea-buckthorn to water stress during seedling stage[J].Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 32(3):0609.
[6]	赵金梅, 周禾, 郭继承,等. 不同水分胁迫对紫花苜蓿分枝期光合性能的影响[J]. 中国草地学报, 2007, 29(2):41. ZHAO Jinmei, ZHOU He, GUO Jicheng, et al. Change of photosynthetic capacity of Medicago sativa Linn under different water-stress intensity during branching[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2007, 29(2):41.
[7]	GUO Weihua, LI Bo, HUANG Yongmei, et al. Effects of different water stresses on ecophysiological characteristics of Hippophae rhamnoides seedlings[J]. Journal of Botany, 2003, 45(10):1238.
[8]	佟长福, 郭克贞, 史海滨,等. 环境因素对紫花苜蓿叶水势与蒸腾速率影响的初步研究[J]. 农业工程学报, 2005, 21(12):152. TONG Changfu, GUO Kezhen, SHI Haibin, et al. Preliminary study on the effect of environmental factor on leaf potential and transpiration rate of Medicago sativa Linn[J]. Transactions of the CSAE, 2005, 21(12):152.
[9]	于贵瑞, 王秋凤. 植物光合、蒸腾与水分利用的生理生态学[M]. 北京:科学出版社, 2010:180. YU Guirui, WANG Qiufeng. Ecophysiology of plant photosynthesis, transpiration, and water use[M]. Beijing:Science Press, Beijing, 2010:180.
[10]	XU Liukang, BALDOCCHI D D. Seasonal trends in photosynthetic parameters and stomatal conductance of blue oak (Quercus douglasii) under prolonged summer drought and high temperature[J]. Tree Physiology, 2003, 23(13):865.
[11]	于贵瑞, 王伯伦. 水稻气孔阻力和蒸腾强度变异特性的研究(一)[J]. 北方水稻, 1995(2):10. YU Guirui, WANG Bolun. Studies on variation characteristics of stomatal resistance and transpiration intensity in Rice (1)[J]. Journal of Northern Rice, 1995(2):10.
[12]	NG P A P, JARVIS P G. Hysteresis in the response of stomatal conductance in Pinus sylvestris L. needles to light:observations and a hypothesis[J]. Plant Cell & Environment, 1980, 3(3):207.
[13]	FRANKS P J, DRAKE P L, FROEND R H. Anisohydric but isohydrodynamic:Seasonally constant plant water potential gradient explained by a stomatal control mechanism incorporating variable plant hydraulic conductance[J]. Plant Cell & Environment, 2007, 30(1):19.
[14]	EDOARDO D, AMILCARE P, IGNACIO R. Coupled dynamics of photosynthesis, transpiration, and soil water balance. Part I:upscaling from hourly to daily Level[J]. Journal of Hydrometeorology, 2003,12(16):546.
[15]	曹琪琪, 王若水, 肖辉杰,等. 宁夏引黄灌区次生盐碱地紫穗槐茎干液流分析[J]. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(7):2347. CAO Qiqi, WANG Ruoshui, XIAO Huijie. Sap flow of Amorpha fruticosa in the secondary saline-alkali land in Ningxia Yellow River irrigation area, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2018, 29(7):2347.
[16]	左应梅, 陈秋波, 邓权权,等. 土壤水分、光照和空气湿度对木薯气孔导度的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2011, 30(4):689. ZUO Yingmei, CHEN Qiubo, DENG Quanquan, et al. Effects of soil moisture, light, and air humidity on stomatal conductance of cassava[J].Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2011, 30(4):689.
[17]	台培东, 郭书海, 宋玉芳,等. 不同生态类型的植物光合生理特性的比较研究[J]. 应用生态学报, 2000, 1(1):53. TAI Peidong, GUO Shuhai, SONG Yufang. Comparison of physiological characteristics of different ecotype plants[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2000, 1(1):53.