欢迎访问作物学报,今天是

作物学报 ›› 2014, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (03): 531-541.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2014.00531

• 耕作栽培·生理生化 • 上一篇    下一篇

不同抗旱性花生品种根系形态及生理特性

厉广辉,万勇善*,刘风珍,张昆   

  1. 作物生物学国家重点实验室 / 山东农业大学农学院, 山东泰安271018
  • 收稿日期:2013-08-06 修回日期:2013-12-15 出版日期:2014-03-12 网络出版日期:2014-01-16
  • 基金资助:

    本研究由国家现代农业产业技术体系建设专项(CARS-14), 国家自然科学基金项目(31201167)和山东省花生良种产业化工程项目资助。

Morphological and Physiological Traits of Root in Different Drought Resistant Peanut Cultivars

LI Guang-Hui, WAN Yong-Shan*, LIU Feng-Zhen, ZHANG Kun   

  1. National Key Laboratory of Crop Biology / College of Agronomy, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai’an 271018, China
  • Received:2013-08-06 Revised:2013-12-15 Published:2014-03-12 Published online:2014-01-16

摘要:

12个花生品种为试验材料, 在人工控水条件下, 通过苗期及结荚期干旱试验, 对比分析花生品种苗期根系性状与抗旱性的关系。结果表明, 花生苗期与结荚期抗旱性基本一致。利用产量抗旱系数可把12个花生品种的抗旱性划分为强、中、弱3, 抗旱性强的品种为A596、山花11和如皋西洋生, 中度抗旱品种为花育20、农大818、海花1号、山花9号和79266, 抗旱性弱的品种有ICG6848、白沙1016、花17和蓬莱一窝猴。山花11可作为花生强抗旱性鉴定的标准品种, 79266可作为花生弱抗旱性鉴定的标准品种。山花9号、山花11、花育20的根系抗旱机制为较大的根量及根系吸收能力, A596、如皋西洋生、农大818、山花11为较强的根系抗氧化能力及膜稳定性。相关分析表明, 苗期重度干旱胁迫下的单株根系干重、体积、总吸收面积、超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)活性和丙二醛(MDA)含量与品种抗旱系数的相关性达极显著水平, 对照与重度干旱胁迫下的以上性状呈极显著正相关。因此, 在花生出苗后10 d进行40%土壤相对含水量的干旱胁迫, 持续胁迫至出苗24 d的单株根系干重、体积、总吸收面积、根尖SOD活性和MDA含量可鉴定花生品种的根系抗旱能力, 正常水分下的性状值也能反映根系性状的抗旱级别。山花11可作为花生根系形态及生理优异抗旱性状鉴定的标准品种。

关键词: 花生品种, 干旱胁迫, 根系特性, 抗旱性

Abstract:

Drought stress is a serious constraint for peanut production worldwide. It is necessary to identify the drought resistance mechanisms of different peanut cultivars in drought-resistance breeding. Under the artificial water control condition, the peanut root morphological and physiological characteristics under drought stress at seedling stage and pod-setting stage were studied using 12 different drought-resistance peanut cultivars as material. The results showed that drought resistance at seedling stage was basically identical with that at pod-setting stage. According to yield-drought resistance coefficient, 12 peanut cultivars were divided into three grades: high-resistance, including A596, Shanhua 11, and Rugaoxiyangsheng; mid-resistance, including Huayu 20, Nongda 818, Haihua 1, Shanhua 9, and 79266; and weak-resistance, including ICG6848, Baisha 1016, Hua 17, and Penglaiyiwohou. In those peanut cultivars, Shanhua11 can be used as the standard cultivar for high drought resistance identification, and 79266 as the standard cultivar for weak one. The root drought resistance mechanism of 12 peanut cultivars were different, Shanhua 9, Shanhua11 and Huayu 20 presented a larger biomass and strong absorption capacity, while A596, Nongda 818, Shanhua 11 and Rugaoxiyangsheng had strong antioxidant capacity and membrane stability under drought stress. Correlations between drought resistance and root weight, volume, total absorption area per plant, root superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity, malondialdehyde (MDA) content under serious drought stress were significant, also under control condition. Therefore, under drought stress of 40% RWC for 10 to 24 d after germination, the root weight, volume, total absorption area per plant, SOD activity and MDA content could be used for identifies the drought resistance ability of peanut roots, the resistances degree also can be reflected by the indices above under normal water condition. Shanhua 11 can be used as a suitable standard cultivar for root morphological and physiological drought resistance characteristics identification in peanut

Key words: Peanut cultivars, Drought stress, Root traits, Drought resistance

[1]姜慧芳, 任小平. 干旱胁迫对花生叶片SOD活性和蛋白质的影响. 作物学报, 2004, 30: 169–174



Jiang H F, Ren X P. The effect on SOD activity and protein content in groundnut leaves by drought stress. Acta Agron Sin, 2004, 30: 169–174 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[2]严美玲, 李向东, 林英杰, 王丽丽, 周录英. 苗期干旱胁迫对不同抗旱花生品种生理特性、产量和品质的影响. 作物学报, 2007, 33: 113–119



Yan M L, Li X D, Lin Y J, Wang L L, Zhou L Y. Effects of drought during seedling stage on physiological traits, yield and quality of different peanut cultivars. Acta Agron Sin, 2007, 33: 113–119 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[3]Kumar A, Singh P, Singh D P, Singh H, Sharma H C. Differences in osmotic regulation in Brassica species. Ann Bot, 1984, 54: 537–541



[4]Upadhyaya H D.Variability for drought resistance related traits in the mini core collection of peanut. Crop Sci, 2005, 45: 1432–1440



[5]Kamoshita A, Babu R C, Boopathi N M, Fukai S. Phenotypic and genotypic analysis of drought-resistance traits for development of rice cultivars adapted to rainfed environments. Field Crops Res, 2008, 109: 1–23



[6]张智猛, 戴良香, 丁红, 陈殿绪, 杨伟强, 宋文武, 万书波. 中国北方主栽花生品种抗旱性鉴定与评价. 作物学报, 2012, 38: 495–504



Zhang Z M, Dai L X, Ding H, Chen D X, Yang W Q, Song W W, Wan S B. Identification and evaluation of drought resistance in different peanut varieties widely grown in northern China. Acta Agron Sin, 2012, 38: 495–504 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[7]王贺正, 李艳, 马均, 张荣萍, 李旭毅, 汪仁全. 水稻苗期抗旱性指标的筛选. 作物学报, 2007, 33: 1523–1529



Wang H Z, Li Y, Ma J, Zhang R P, Li X Y, Wang R Q. Screening indexes of drought resistance during seedling stage in rice. Acta Agron Sin, 2007, 33: 1523–1529 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[8]王士强, 胡银岗, 佘奎军, 周琳璘, 孟凡磊. 小麦抗旱相关农艺性状和生理生化性状的灰色关联度分析. 中国农业科学, 2007, 40: 2452–2459



Wang S Q, Hu Y G, She K J, Zhou L L, Meng F L. Gray relational grade analysis of agronomical and physi-biochemical traits related to drought tolerance in wheat. Sci Agric Sin, 2007, 40: 2452–2459 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[9]严美玲, 李向东, 矫岩林, 王丽丽. 不同花生品种的抗旱性比较鉴定. 花生学报, 2004, 33: 8–12



Yan M L, Li X D, Jiao Y L, Wang L L. Identification of drought resistance in different peanut varieties. J Peanut Sci, 2004, 33: 8–12 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[10]张智猛, 万书波, 戴良香, 宋文武, 陈静, 石运庆. 花生抗旱性鉴定指标的筛选与评价. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35: 100–109



Zhang Z M, Wan S B, Dai L X, Song W W, Chen J, Shi Y Q. Estimating and screening of drought resistance indexes of peanut. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2011, 35: 100–109 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[11]谭忠, 朱新亮, 刘文霞, 吴学军. 花生种质资源抗旱性鉴定及综合利用评价. 中国油料, 1997, 19: 73–75



Tan Z, Zhu X L, Liu W X, Wu X J. Drought-resistant characterization and evaluation of pre-selected groundnut germplasm. Oil Crops China, 1997, 19: 73–75 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[12]姜慧芳, 任小平, 段乃雄. 中国龙生型花生的耐旱性鉴定与综合评价. 中国农业科学, 1999, 32: 59–63



Jiang H F, Ren X P, Duan N X. Screening and evaluation for drought tolerance in Chinese dragon groundnut. Sci Agrica Sin, 1999, 32: 59–63 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[13]胡标林, 余守武, 万勇, 张铮, 邱兵余, 谢建坤. 东乡普通野生稻全生育期抗旱性鉴定. 作物学报, 2007, 33: 425–432



Hu B L, Yu S W, Wan Y, Zhang Z, Qiu B Y, Xie J K. Drought-resistance identification of Dongxiang common wild rice (Oryza rufipogon) in whole growth period. Acta Agron Sin, 2007, 33: 425–432 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[14]杨建昌, 王志琴, 朱庆森. 水稻品种的抗旱性及其生理特性的研究. 中国农业科学, 1995, 28: 65–72



Yang J C, Wang Z Q, Zhu Q S. Drought resistance and its physiological characteristics in rice varieties. Sci Agric Sin, 1995, 28: 65–72 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[15]慕自新, 张岁岐, 梁爱华, 梁宗锁. 玉米整株根系水导与其表型抗旱性的关系研究. 作物学报, 2005, 31: 203–208



Mu Z X, Zhang S Q, Liang A H, Liang Z S. Relationship between maize root hydraulic conductivity and drought resistance. Acta Agron Sin, 2005, 31: 203–208 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[16]段舜山, 谷文祥, 张大勇, 李凤民. 半干旱地区小麦群体的根系特征与抗旱性的关系. 应用生态学报, 1997, 8: 134–138



Duan S S, Gu W X, Zhang D Y, Li F M. Relationship between root system characteristics and drought resistance of wheat populations in semiarid region. Chin J Appl Ecol, 1997, 8: 134–138 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[17]Benjamin J G, Nielsen D C. Water deficit effects on root distribution of soybean, field pea and chickpea. Field Crops Res, 2006, 97: 248–253



[18]Jongrungklang N, Toomsan B, Vorasoot N, Jogloy S, Boote K J, Hoogenboom G, Patanothai A. Rooting traits of peanut genotypes with different yield responses to pre-flowering drought stress. Field Crops Res, 2011, 120: 262–270



[19]赵世杰, 史国安, 董新纯. 植物生理学实验指导. 北京: 中国农业科技出版社, 2002. pp 45–47



Zhao S J, Shi G A, Dong X C. Plant Physiology Test Guide. Beijing: Chinese Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2002. pp 45–47 (in Chinese)



[20]王爱国, 罗广华, 邵从本, 吴淑君, 郭俊彦. 大豆种子超氧物歧化酶的研究. 植物生理学报, 1983, 9: 77–84



Wang A G, Luo G H, Shao C B, Wu S J, Guo J Y. A study on the superoxide dismutase of soybean seeds. Acta Phytophysiol Sin, 1983, 9: 77–84 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[21]Wakamatsu K, Takahama U. Changes in peroxidase activity andin peroxidsae isozymes in carrot callus. Physiol Plant, 1993, 88: 167–171



[22]林植芳, 李双顺, 林桂珠, 孙谷畴, 郭俊彦. 水稻叶片的衰老与超氧物歧化酶活性的关系及脂质过氧化作用的关系. 植物学报, 1984, 26: 605–615



Lin Z F, Li S S, Lin G Z, Sun G C, Guo J Y. Superoxide dismutase activity and lipid peroxidation in relation to senescence of rice leaves. Acta Bot Sin, 1984, 26: 605–615 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[23]陈建勋, 王晓峰. 植物生理学实验指导. 广州: 华南理工大学出版社, 2006. pp 75–77



Chen J X, Wang X F. Plant Physiology Test Guide. Guangzhou: South China University of Technology Press, 2006. pp 75–77 (in Chinese)



[24]封海胜, 栾文琪. 中国花生品种志. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1987. pp 1–4



Feng H S, Luan W Q. Peanut cultivars of China. Beijing: China agriculture press, 1987. pp 1–4 (in Chinese)



[25]张永清, 苗果园. 水分胁迫条件下有机肥对小麦根苗生长的影响. 作物学报, 2006, 32: 811–816



Zhang Y Q, Miao G Y. Effects of manure on root and shoot growth of winter wheat under water stress. Acta Agron Sin, 2006, 32: 811–816 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[26]杨守萍, 陈加敏, 刘莹, 喻德跃, 盖钧镒. 大豆苗期耐旱性与根系性状的鉴定和分析. 大豆科学, 2005, 24: 176–182



Yang S P, Chen J M, Liu Y, Yu D Y, Gai J Y. Identification and analysis of drought tolerance and root traits of seedlings in soybeans. Soybean Sci, 2005, 24: 176–182 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[27]梁银丽, 杨翠玲. 不同抗旱型小麦根系形态与生理特性对渗透胁迫的反应. 西北农业学报, 1995, 4: 31–36



Liang Y L, Yang C L. Responses of root system morphology and physiological characters on osmotic stress in drought resistance wheat varieties. Acta Agric Boreali-occident Sin, 1995, 4: 31–36 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[28]宋海星, 王学立. 玉米根系活力及吸收面积的空间分布变化. 西北农业学报, 2005, 14: 137–141



Song H X, Wang X L. The space distribution of the maize root activity and its absorbing area. Acta Agric Boreali-Occident Sin, 2005, 14: 137–141 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[29]刘莹, 盖钧镒, 吕慧能. 大豆根区逆境耐性的种质鉴定及其与根系性状的关系. 作物学报, 2005, 31: 1132–1137



Liu Y, Gai J Y, Lü H N. Identification of rhizosphere abiotic stress tolerance and related root traits in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. Acta Agron Sin, 2005, 31: 1132–1137 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[30]Cristina S, Branka S, Flavia N I. Role of phenolics in the antioxidative status of the resurrection plant Ramonda serbica during dehydration and rehydration. Physiol Plant, 2004, 122: 478–485



[31]齐伟, 张吉旺, 王空军, 刘鹏, 董树亭. 干旱胁迫对不同耐旱性玉米杂交种产量和根系生理特性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2010, 21: 48–52



Qi W, Zhang J W, Wang K J, Liu P, Dong S T. Effects of drought stress on the grain yield and root physiological traits of maize varieties with different drought tolerance. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2010, 21: 48–52 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[32]尚晓颍, 刘化冰, 张小全, 林娟, 段旺军, 杨铁钊. 干旱胁迫对不同烤烟品种根系生长和生理特性的影响. 西北植物学报, 2010, 30: 357–361



Shang X Y, Liu H B, Zhang X Q, Lin J, Duan W J, Yang T Z. Growth and physiological characteristics of roots in different flue-cured tobacco varieties under drought stress. Acta Bot Boreal-Occident Sin, 2010, 30: 357–361 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[33]王思思, 张吉旺, 刘鹏, 董树亭, 王空军. 干旱对不同玉米品种苗期根系生理生化特性的影响. 山东农业科学, 2009, 6: 36–38



Wang S S, Zhang J W, Liu P, Dong S T, Wang K J. Effect of drought on root physiological and biochemical characters of different maize cultivars during seedling stage. Shandong Agric Sci, 2009, 6: 36–38 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[34]盖钧镒, 汪越胜, 张孟臣, 王继安, 常汝镇. 中国大豆品种熟期组划分的研究. 作物学报, 2001, 27: 286–292



Gai J Y, Wang Y S, Zhang M C, Wang J A, Chang R Z. Studies on the classification of maturity groups of soybeans in China. Acta Agron Sin, 2001, 27: 286–292 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[35]陈加敏. 大豆苗期耐旱性的鉴定及苗期耐旱性和根系性状的遗传研究. 南京农业大学硕士论文, 2004



Chen J M. Studies on Identification of Drought Tolerance and Genetic Mechanism of Drought Tolerance and Root Traits of Soybean Seedling. MS Thesis of Nanjing Agricultural University, 2004 (in Chinese with English abstract)

[1] 于天一, 王春晓, 肖丽, 钟召迪, 王宣仓, 赵勇, 路亚, 吴月, 吴正锋. 不同结瘤特性花生品种氮素累积、产量及品质特性对氮肥用量的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 881-894.
[2] 杨飚, 杜帅康, 张继旺, 石瑛, 张丽莉. 马铃薯III类POD基因家族的全基因组鉴定及其表达谱分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(2): 405-420.
[3] 胡城祯, 高维东, 孔斌雪, 王建飞, 车卓, 杨德龙, 陈涛. 小麦TaAPC11基因家族鉴定及TaAPC11-5B参与干旱胁迫的生物学功能研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 148-164.
[4] 王雅致, 杨飚, 季香林, 石瑛, 张丽莉. 二倍体马铃薯抗旱资源鉴定及抗旱基因初步筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 72-84.
[5] 迟晓元, 刘庆, 张君, 赵旭红, 李美, 于天一, 潘丽娟, 许静, 姜骁, 殷祥贞, 马俊卿, 陈娜. 不同花生品种(系)耐盐碱性田间鉴定及各性状指标相关性研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 85-98.
[6] 孔娜, 刘涛, 刘文婷, 陈刚, 文利超, 邓智超, 郭梅, 李伟, 郭永峰. 烟草NtCEP7基因克隆及其编码小肽在苗期抗旱中的作用分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 249-261.
[7] 刘海波, 张蕾, 王立琦, 石晓丽, 周文莹, 崔国贤, 佘玮. 苎麻BnGCL1基因响应干旱胁迫的功能研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 14-27.
[8] 何鹏旭, 姚立蓉, 陈远玲, 闫妍, 张宏, 汪军成, 李葆春, 杨轲, 司二静, 孟亚雄, 马小乐, 王化俊. 大麦干旱胁迫萌发生理及分子机理的差异性与相关性研究[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(9): 2412-2432.
[9] 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.
[10] 陆雯佳, 汪军成, 姚立蓉, 张宏, 司二静, 杨轲, 孟亚雄, 李葆春, 马小乐, 王化俊. 大麦PRX基因家族全基因组鉴定及其干旱胁迫下的表达分析[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(5): 1198-1214.
[11] 王林, 陈晓雨, 张文梦龙, 汪思琦, 程冰云, 程靖秋, 潘锐, 张文英. 大麦HvMYB2分子特性及响应干旱胁迫的功能分析[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(4): 873-887.
[12] 晋高锐, 吴小丽, 邓丽, 陈玉宁, 喻博伦, 郭建斌, 丁膺宾, 刘念, 罗怀勇, 陈伟刚, 黄莉, 周小静, 淮东欣, 谭家壮, 姜慧芳, 任丽, 雷永, 廖伯寿. 兼抗黄曲霉侵染和产毒高油酸花生新种质的创制与评价[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(3): 687-895.
[13] 金欣欣, 宋亚辉, 苏俏, 杨永庆, 李玉荣, 王瑾. 冀花系列高油酸花生抗旱性鉴定与综合评价[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(3): 797-811.
[14] 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.
[15] 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.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!