欢迎访问作物学报，今天是
作物学报

作物学报 ›› 2011, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (04): 711-716.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2011.00711

• 耕作栽培·生理生化 • 上一篇    下一篇

腐植酸提高食用型甘薯块根可溶性糖含量的生理基础

柳洪鹃1,李作梅1,史春余1,*,张立明2,*   

  1. 1 山东农业大学农学院 / 作物生物学国家重点实验室，山东泰安 271018；2 山东省农业科学院，山东济南 250100
  • 收稿日期:2010-09-27 修回日期:2011-01-06 出版日期:2011-04-12 网络出版日期:2011-02-24
  • 通讯作者: 史春余, E-mail: scyu@sdau.edu.cn, Tel: 0538-8246259; 张立明, E-mail: zhanglm11@sina.com.cn
  • 基金资助:

    本研究由山东省自然科学基金项目(Y2007D14)和国家甘薯产业技术体系北方薯区栽培岗位科学家资助。

Physiological Basis of Improving Soluble Sugar Content in Sweetpotato for Table Use by Humic Acid Application

LIU Hong-Juan1,LI Zuo-Mei1,SHI Chun-Yu1,*,ZHANG Li-Ming2,*   

  1. 1 Agronomy College, Shandong Agricultural University / State Key Laboratory of Crop Biology, Tai’an 271018, China; 2 Shandong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Jinan 250100, China
  • Received:2010-09-27 Revised:2011-01-06 Published:2011-04-12 Published online:2011-02-24
  • Contact: 史春余, E-mail: scyu@sdau.edu.cn, Tel: 0538-8246259; 张立明, E-mail: zhanglm11@sina.com.cn

PDF

1555

摘要： 选用典型的食用型甘薯品种北京553，设置施用腐植酸和对照处理，于2008—2009年2个生长季在山东农业大学农学试验站进行试验。在甘薯块根膨大过程中定期取样，测定块根可溶性糖和淀粉含量及相关酶活性、功能叶蔗糖含量及相关酶活性变化。结果表明, 与对照比较，施用腐植酸显著提高了功能叶磷酸蔗糖合酶活性和蔗糖含量，生育期内平均增幅分别为30.90%和9.48%，显著降低了块根蔗糖合酶活性，平均降幅为11.04%，促进了蔗糖、果聚糖等在块根中的积累；同时，施用腐植酸还显著提高了块根中淀粉酶活性，α-淀粉酶和β-淀粉酶平均增幅分别为11.33%、15.70%，促进了后期葡萄糖、果糖等在块根中的积累。在甘薯收获期，块根可溶性总糖含量提高了15.49%、淀粉含量降低了3.56%。总之，施用腐植酸能够增加块根中蔗糖的供应量、抑制可溶性糖向淀粉转化、促进淀粉水解，这些是提高块根可溶性总糖含量的生理基础。

关键词: 甘薯, 腐植酸, 块根, 可溶性糖, 糖代谢酶

Abstract: Soluble sugar content is a main index of edible quality in storage root of sweetpotato for table use.  Previous research showed that soluble sugar content in storage organs of plants was increased significantly by application of humic acid (HA), butthere have been little research on their physiological basis. The objective of this study was to clarify the physiological basis of soluble sugar content improvement in storage root of sweetpotato by using humic acid. The typical varieties of sweetpotato for table use (Beijing 553) was grown in a replicated experiment at agricultural experiment station of Shandong Agricultural University in two summer growing seasons of 2008 and 2009. The treatments included the control and treatment applied HA. The changes of starch content, soluble sugar content and relative enzymes activity during root tuber development, and sucrose content and relative enzymes activity in functional leaves were determined by using periodic sampling during storage root development. The results showed that compared with the control, sucrose phosphate synthase (SPS) activity and sucrose content in functional leaves were increased significantly, with the average increase of 30.90% and 9.48% during whole growth period, while sucrose synthase (SS) activity in storage root was decreased significantly with the average declines by 11.04%, that could promote accumulation of sucrose and fructan in storage root in treatment of HA. Amylase activity in treatment of applying HA was increased significantly with the average increase of 11.33% and 15.70%, respectively for α-amylase and β-amylase activity, that enlarged the accumulation of fructose and glucose in storage root. At harvest, the soluble sugar content was increased by 15.49% and the starch content was decreased by 3.56%. The increase of sucrose content, the decrease of the inversion quantity from soluble sugar to starch and the hydrolysis enhancement of starch in storage root are the physiological basis of increasing soluble sugar of storage root.

Key words: Sweetpotato, Humic acid, Storage root, Soluble sugar, Carbohydrate metabolic enzymes

[1]Ma D-F(马代夫), Qiu J(邱军), Fang B-P(房伯平), Sun J-Y(孙近友), Liu Y-H(刘玉恒), Liu Q-C(刘庆昌), Zhang L-M(张立明). Investigation of national sweetpotato regional test and recommendations on industrial development. Rain Fed Crops (杂粮作物), 2004, 24(5): 306–308 (in Chinese)
[2]Zhang L-M(张立明), Wang Q-M(王庆美), Wang Y-C(王荫墀). The main nutrient components and health care function of sweetpotato. Rain Fed Crops (杂粮作物), 2003, 23(3): 162–166 (in Chinese)
[3]Shi C-Y(史春余), Wang R-J(王汝娟), Liang T-B(梁太波), Wang Z-L(王振林). Characterization of carbohydrate metabolism in relation to quality of storage root in edible sweetpotato. Sci Agric Sin (中国农业科学), 2008, 41(11): 3878–3885 (in Chinese with English abstract )
[4]Zhang Q-H(张清华), Wang C-Q(王成秋), Han W-C(韩为灿), Fan R-P(范荣平), Han C-B(韩超兵). Study on the application of foliar humic acid in citrus. Humic Acid (腐植酸), 1996, (3): 13–15 (in Chinese)
[5]Ma H-G(马海刚), Xu W-L(徐万里), He S-L(何生丽), Jiang C-Y(蒋晨义), Sun H-W(孙好文), Cai Z-Y(蔡泽宇). Effect of humic acid fertilizer on applied fertilizer and quality of processing tomato. Xinjiang Agric Sci (新疆农业科学), 2009, 46(4): 772–775 (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]Zhang J-Z(张继舟), Yuan L(袁磊), Ma X-F(马献发). Effects of humic acid on soil nutrients and salts, and on yield and quality of tomato in greenhouse. Humic Acid (腐植酸), 2008, (3): 19–22 (in Chinese)
[7]Yao H-L(姚海兰), Shi C-Y(史春余), Wang R-J(王汝娟). Effects of potassium humate on storage root quality of edible sweetpotato. Humic Acid (腐植酸), 2009, (1): 24–28 (in Chinese)
[8]Wang Y-Q(王艳群), Zhang X-G(张笑归), Xue S-C(薛世川), Gao R-T(高如泰), Zhou Y-P(周亚鹏). Effects of weathered coal and microelement fertilizer on the biologic yield and quality of crown daisy. Chin Agric Sci Bull (中国农学通报), 2008, 24(1): 293–296 (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]Xiang G-D(项国栋), Zou D-Y(邹德乙), Li R(李荣). Study on effect of humic acid fertilizer specified for vegetable on growth of strawberry and its best application rate. Humic Acid (腐植酸), 2006, (5): 38–42 (in Chinese)
[10]Du H-Y(杜会英), Xue S-C(薛世川), Sun Z-M(孙志梅), Yang Y-M(杨云马), Wang Y-Q(王艳群), Li Y-C(李迎春). The effect of humic acid (HA) compound fertilizer on the quality and production of grape. J Agric Univ Hebei (河北农业大学学报), 2004, 27(4): 63–66 (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]Shi C-Y(史春余), Zhang F-D(张夫道), Zhang S-Q(张树清), Li H(李辉), Fu C-G(付成高). Effects of organic-inorganic slow release fertilizers on yield and nitrogen recovery in tomato. Plant Nutr Fert Sci (植物营养与肥料学报), 2004, 37(6): 1183–1187 (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]Padem H, Ocal A. Effects of humic acid applications on yield and some characteristics of processing tomato. Acta Hort, 2002, 487: 173–179
[13]Ertan Yildirim. Foliar and soil fertilization of humic acid affect productivity and quality of tomato. Acta Agric Scandinavica Section B-Soil Plant Sci, 2007, 57: 182–186
[14]He P(何萍), Yang J(杨金), Zhou W(周卫). The effect of humic acid (HA) compound fertilizer on yield, quality and physiological activity in tomato. Chin J Soil Sci (土壤通报), 1997, 28(6): 277–279 (in Chinese)
[15]Lin R-X(林汝湘), Xie C-S(谢春生), Feng Z-X(冯祖虾), Huang H-C(黄宏城). A study on several nutritional compositions of sweetpotato germplasm in south China. Sci Agric Sin (中国农业科学), 1995, 28(4): 39–45 (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]Li L(李良), Liao J-X(廖嘉信), Lai Z-R(赖昭蓉). Relationship between eating quality components and physico-chemical properties in sweetpotato. J Chin Agron Assoc (中华农学会报), 1991, 156: 83–94 (in Chinese)
[17]Guo A-G(郭蔼光). Basic Biochemistry (基础生物化学). Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2008. pp 139–141, 203–205 (in Chinese)
[18]Douglas C D, Tsung M K, Frederick C F. Enzymes of sucrose and hexose metablism in development kernels of two inbreds of maize. Plant Physiol, 1988, 86: 1 013–1 019
[19]Tsai-Mei, Ou-Lee, Setter T L. Effect of increased temperature in apical regions of maize ears on starch-synthesis enzymes and accumulation of sugars and starch. Plant Physiol, 1985, 79: 852–855
[20]Yu X-J(於新建). Experimental Manual of Plant Physiology (植物生理学实验手册). Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific and Technical Publisher, 1985. pp 148–149 (in Chinese)
[21]Wardlaw I F, Willenbrink J. Carbonhydrate storage and mobilization by the culm of wheat between heading and grain maturity: the relation to sucrose synthase and sucrose-phosphate synthase. Aust J Plant Physiol, 1994, 21: 251–271
[22]Smith D A, Prescott H E. Sugar content and activity of sucrose metabolism enzymes in milled rice grain. Plant Physiol, 1989, 89: 893–896
[23]Keeling P L, Wood J R, Tyson R H, Bridges I G. Starch biosynthesis in developing wheat grain. Plant Physiol, 1988, 87: 311–319
[1] 王懿涵, 李富昌, 刘意, 朱国鹏. 甘薯IbOPR2基因启动子克隆及调控因子的筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1268-1276.
[2] 蒋嘉卉, 江炳志, 刘冠明, 王章英, 唐朝臣. 紫肉甘薯品质性状的近红外光谱预测模型构建与优化[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1088-1102.
[3] 于永超, 刘明, 靳容, 赵鹏, 张强强, 王静, 朱晓亚, 唐忠厚. 甘薯高氮徒长的生理机制和转录组分析研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 813-824.
[4] 杨璇, 李健康, 何婉洁, 李友军, 程相涵, 侯文邦. 硒肥对甘薯鲜切后褐变的影响及其机理解析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(2): 578-589.
[5] 张海燕, 解备涛, 董顺旭, 张立明, 段文学. 滴灌条件下不同水溶肥种类和配比对鲜食甘薯产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(9): 2485-2500.
[6] 尹雨萌, 王雁楠, 康志河, 乔守晨, 卞倩倩, 李亚蔚, 曹郭郑, 赵国瑞, 徐丹丹, 杨育峰. 甘薯谷胱甘肽S-转移酶基因IbGSTU7的克隆及功能分析[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(7): 1736-1746.
[7] 阳新月, 肖人滈, 张林茜, 唐铭均, 孙光燕, 杜康, 吕长文, 唐道彬, 王季春. 不同生育期涝渍对甘薯抗逆生理特性及产量形成的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(3): 744-754.
[8] 霍如雪, 葛祥菡, 石嘉, 李雪蕊, 戴圣杰, 刘振宁, 李宗芸. 甘薯组氨酸激酶蛋白IbHK5响应干旱和盐胁迫的功能分析[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(3): 650-666.
[9] 王语新, 陈天羽, 翟红, 张欢, 高少培, 何绍贞, 赵宁, 刘庆昌. 甘薯激酶基因IbHT1的克隆及抗旱性功能鉴定[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(2): 301-311.
[10] 磨冬枝, 刘芃君, 徐桂娣, 陈泽炀, 谭雪明, 黄英金, 程建峰, 曾研华. 有机无机肥配施对甘薯产量、品质及硒吸收的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(12): 3342-3356.
[11] 张顺杰, 吴维泰, 冉禧玥, 赵梓含, 韩永辉, 吴正丹, 张凯. 甘薯β淀粉酶基因IbBAM48829的功能解析[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(11): 3096-3104.
[12] 孙一鸣, 田侠, 王少霞, 刘庆. 不同施磷水平对甘薯硒吸收、分配和转化的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(6): 1608-1615.
[13] 杨春菊, 唐道彬, 张凯, 杜康, 黄红, 乔欢欢, 王季春, 吕长文. 氮钾减量配施对甘薯产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(5): 1341-1350.
[14] 朱晓亚, 张强强, 赵鹏, 刘明, 王静, 靳容, 于永超, 唐忠厚. 叶面喷施丹参碳点缓解甘薯低磷胁迫的转录组与代谢组学分析[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(2): 383-393.
[15] 蒋杨影, 唐铭均, 张林茜, 吕长文, 唐道彬, 王季春. 生长前期光照强度对甘薯叶片光合生理和结薯的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(10): 2575-2585.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
京ICP备15008789号-2