欢迎访问作物学报,今天是

作物学报 ›› 2014, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (09): 1667-1676.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2014.01667

• 耕作栽培·生理生化 • 上一篇    下一篇

玉米自交系吐丝期叶片光合参数与其耐旱性的关系

陈春梅,高聚林*,苏治军,于晓芳,胡树平,赵晓亮   

  1. 内蒙古农业大学农学院, 内蒙古呼和浩特 010019
  • 收稿日期:2013-12-16 修回日期:2014-06-16 出版日期:2014-09-12 网络出版日期:2014-07-10
  • 通讯作者: 高聚林, E-mail: nmgaojulin@163.com
  • 基金资助:

    本研究由内蒙古杰出青年基金项目(2011JQ02), 国家现代农业产业技术体系建设专项(CARS-02-63)和国家粮食丰产科技工程项目(2011BAD16B13, 2012BAD04B04, 2013BAD07B04, 2011BAD16B14)资助。

Relationship between Leaf Photosynthetic Parameters and Drought Resistance at Silking Stage in Maize Inbred Lines

CHEN Chun-Mei,GAO Ju-Lin*,SU Zhi-Jun,YU Xiao-Fang,HU Shu-Ping,ZHAO Xiao-Liang   

  1. College of Agriculture, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010019, China?
  • Received:2013-12-16 Revised:2014-06-16 Published:2014-09-12 Published online:2014-07-10
  • Contact: 高聚林, E-mail: nmgaojulin@163.com

摘要:

从玉米自交系吐丝期光合特性适应干旱环境的角度,探索玉米自交系的耐旱性。2012年在土默川平原灌区和河套平原灌区以及2013年河套平原灌区,利用耐旱性不同的51个玉米自交系,在吐丝期采取干旱胁迫处理,研究分析了叶片光合相关参数对干旱胁迫的响应及其与耐旱性的关系。结果表明,玉米自交系在吐丝期干旱胁迫与正常灌溉条件下PnTrGsCiFv/FmΦPSII和SPAD的相对值与其耐旱系数呈极显著正相关,WUE相对值与耐旱系数呈极显著负相关,而qNqP的相对值与耐旱系数不相关;上述8个叶片光合参数与耐旱系数的逐步回归分析表明,Pn、WUE、Fv/FmΦPSII和SPAD相对值与耐旱系数在0.01水平显著相关,Pn、WUE、SPAD相对值对耐旱系数有直接贡献,而Fv/FmΦPSII对耐旱系数起间接作用。通过上述5个显著相关光合参数将两年三地表现一致的32份自交系的抗旱性分为3类,第1类8份(H201、H21、英64、吉842、早49、吉8415、东46和沈137)属于耐旱性强的;第2类15份属于耐旱性较强的;第3类9份属于耐旱性弱的,此结果与对应的自交系产量差异分类结果相一致。因此,玉米自交系吐丝期Pn、WUE、Fv/FmΦPSII、SPAD的相对值和耐旱系数可作为其耐旱性评价指标。建立了3类耐旱性玉米自交系吐丝期Pn、WUE、Fv/FmΦPSII、SPAD的相对值与耐旱系数的回归关系,并明确了其阈值范围。

关键词: 玉米自交系, 吐丝期, 干旱胁迫, 光合指标

Abstract:

 To explore drought resistance of maize inbred lines, based on leaf photosynthetic parameters at silking stage, we treated 51 maize inbred lines with drought stress at silking stage in Humochuanpingyuanguanqu and Hetaopingyuanguanqu in 2012 and 2013 to analyze response of leaf photosynthetic parameters to drought stress and the relationship between photosynthetic parameters and drought tolerance. The result indicated that at silking stage, no matter under drought and the condition of irrigation, Pn, Tr, Gs, Ci, Fv/Fm, ΦPSII, and SPAD had a significant and positive correlation with drought resistance coefficient, WUE had a significant and negative correlation with it, while qN and qP had no correlation with it. Stepwise regression analysis on the eight leaf photosynthetic parameters above showed that Pn, WUE, Fv/Fm, ΦPSII, and SPAD significantly correlated with drought resistance coefficient at P < 0.01. Pn, WUE and SPAD directly contributed to drought resistance coefficient, while Fv/Fm and ΦPSII contributed indirectly. Thirty-two maize inbred lines were classified into three groups based on different drought resistance, group 1 with the highest drought resistance contained eight inbred lines (H201, H21, Ying 64, Ji 842, Zao 49, Ji 8415, Dong 46, and Shen 137), group 2 with the higher drought resistance contained fifteen lines and group 3 with the lowest drought resistance contained nine lines. The grouping result was consistant with that of yield classification.Therefore, at silking stage, Pn, WUE, Fv/Fm, ΦPSII, SPAD, and drought resistance coefficient can be used as drought resistance evaluation indexes established for the three groups of maize inbred lines. Regression relationship was between Pn, WUE, Fv/Fm, ΦPSII, SPAD, and drought resistance coefficient at silking stage, and the threshold values were confirmed.

Key words: Maize inbred lines, silking stage, drought stress, photosynthetic parameter

[1]Campos H, Cooper M, Habben J E, Edmeades G O, Schussler J R. Improving drought tolerance in maize: a view from industry. Field Crops Res, 2004, 90: 19–34



[2]Welsh Catherine E, McMillan L. Accelerating the inbreeding of multi-parental recombinant inbred lines generated by sibling matings. Genes, Genomes, Genetics (Bethesda), 2012, 2: 191–198



[3]Henry T, Singh S P. Comparison of sources and lines selected for drought resistance in common bean. Crop Sci, 2002, 42: 64–70



[4]Lee M, Jung J H, Han D Y, Seo P J, Park W J, Park C M. Activation of a flavin monooxygenase gene YUCCA7 enhances drought resistance in Arabidopsis. Planta, 2012, 235: 925–938



[5]De Diego N, Pérez-Alfocea F, Cantero E, Lacuesta M, Moncaleán P. Physiological response to drought in radiata pine: phytohormone implication at leaf level. Tree Physiol, 2012, 32: 435–449



[6]Medrano H, Escalona J M, Bota J, Gulías J, Flexas J. Regulation of photosynthesis of C3 plants in response to progressive drought: stomatal conductance as a reference parameter. Ann Bot, 2002, 89: 895–905



[7]Saint Pierre C, Crossa J L, Bonnett D, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K, Reynolds M P. Phenotyping transgenic wheat for drought resistance. J Exp Bot, 2012, 63: 1799–1808



[8]Deeba F, Pandey A K, Ranjan S, Mishra A, Singh R, Sharma Y K, Shirke P A, Pandey V. Physiological and proteomic responses of cotton (Gossypium herbaceum L.) to drought stress. Plant Physiol Biochem, 2012, 53: 6–18



[9]H Sjursen, Bayley M, Holmstrup M. Enhanced drought tolerance of a soil-dwelling springtail by pre-acclimation to a mild drought stress. J Insect Physiol, 2001, 47: 1021–1027



[10]Aroca R, Irigoyen J J, Sánchez-díaz M. Drought enhances maize chilling tolerance: II. Photosynthetic traits and protective mechanisms against oxidative stress. Physiol Plant, 2003, 117: 540–549



[11]Baker N R, Rosenqvist E. Application of chlorophyll fluorescencecan improve crop production strategies: an examination of future possibilities. J Exp Bot, 2004, 55: 1607–1621



[12]Schreiber U, Schliwa U, Bilger W. Continuous recording of photochemical and non photochemical chlorophyll fluorescence equenching with a new type of modulation fluorometer. Photosynth Res, 1986, 10: 51–62



[13]Selmani A, Wasson C E. Daytime chlorophyll fluorescence measurement in field-grown maize and its genetic variability under well-water and water-stressed conditions. Field Crops Res, 2003, 31: 173–184



[14]胡秀丽, 李艳辉, 杨海荣, 刘全军, 李潮海. HSP70可提高干旱高温复合胁迫诱导的玉米叶片抗氧化防护能力. 作物学报, 2010, 36: 636–644



Hu X L, Li Y H, Yang H R, Liu Q J, Li C H. Heat shock protein 70 may improve the ability of antioxidant defense induced by the combination of drought and heat in maize leaves. Acta Agron Sin, 2010, 36: 636–644 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[15]Hsiao. Plant responses to water stress. Annu Rev Plant Physical, 1973, 24: 570–579



[16]Harrigan G G, Ridley W P, Miller K D, Sorbet R, Riordan S G, Nemeth M A, Reeves W, Pester T A. The forage and grain of MON 87460, a drought-tolerant corn hybrid, are compositionally equivalent to that of conventional corn. J Agric Food Chem, 2009, 57: 9754–9763



[17]张守仁. 叶绿素荧光动力学参数的意义及讨论. 植物学通报, 1999, 16: 444–448



Zhang S R. A discussion of chlorophyll fluorescence kinetics parameter and their significance. Chin Bull Bot, 1999, 16: 444–448 (in Chinese)



[18]Lu Y L, Hao Z F, Xie C X. Large-scale screening for maize drought resistance using multiple selection criteria evaluated under water-stressed and well-watered environments. Field Crops Res, 2011, 124: 37–45



[19]许大全. 光合作用效率. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 2009



Xu D Q. Photosynthetic Efficiency. Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific and Technical Publishers, 2009 (in Chinese)



[20]Harp R E, Poroyko V, Hejlek L G, Spollen W G, Springer G K, Bohnert H J, Nguyen H T. Root growth maintenance during water deficits: physiology to functional genomies. J Exp Bot, 2004, 55: 2343–2351



[21]陈建明, 俞晓平, 程家安. 叶绿素荧光动力学及其在植物抗逆生理研究中的应用. 浙江农业学报, 2006, 18(1): 51–55



Chen J M, Yu X P, Cheng J A. The application of chlorophyll fluorescence kinetics in the study of physiological responses of plants to environmental stresses. Acta Agric Zhejiangensis, 2006, 18(1): 51–55 (in Chinese)



[22]白向历, 孙世贤, 杨国航, 刘明, 张振平, 齐华. 不同生育时期水分胁迫对玉米产量及生长发育的影响. 玉米科学, 2009, 17(2): 60–63



Bai X L, Sun S X, Yang G H, Liu M, Zhang Z P, Qi H. Effect of water stress on maize yield during different growing stages. J Maize Sci, 2009, 17(2): 60–63(in Chinese with English abstract)



[23]孙璐, 周宇飞, 汪澈, 肖木辑, 陶冶, 许文娟, 黄瑞冬.高粱品种萌发期耐盐性筛选与鉴定. 中国农业科学, 2012,45: 1714–1722



Sun L, Zhou Y F, Wang C, Xiao M J, Tao Y, Xu W J, Huang R D. Screening and identification of sorghum cultivars for salinity tolerance during germination. Sci Agric Sin, 2012, 45: 1714–1722 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[24]Baquedano F J, Castillo F J. Comparative ecophysiological effects of drought on seedlings of the Mediterranean water-saver Pinus halepensis and water-spenders Quercus coccifera and Quercus ilex. Trees, 2006, 20: 689–700



[25]付学琴, 贺浩华, 文飘, 罗向东, 谢建坤. 东乡野生稻回交重组系的抗旱性评价体系. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23: 1277–1285



Fu X Q, He H H, Wen P, Luo X D, Xie J K. Drought resistance evaluation system for backcross lines of Dongxiang common wild rice (Oryza rufipogon Griff.). Chin J Appl Ecol, 2012, 23: 1277–1285 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[26]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



Li H S. Experimental Principle and Technique for Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2000 (in Chinese)



[27]Bouslama M, Schapaugh W T Jr. Stress tolerance in soybeans: I. Evaluation of three screening techniques for heat and drought tolerance. Crop Sci, 1984, 24: 933–937



[28]龚明. 作物抗旱性鉴定方法与指标及其综合评价. 云南农业大学学报, 1989, 4(1): 73–81



Gong M. Screening methods and index of drought resistance in crops and comprehensive evaluation. J Yunnan Agric Univ, 1989, 4(11): 73–81 (in Chinese)



[29]Pollard Daniel A. Design and construction of recombinant inbred lines. Methods Mol Biol, 2012, 871: 31–39

[1] 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.
[2] 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.
[3] 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.
[4] 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.
[5] 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.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.
[8] 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.
[9] 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.
[10] 马群, 王志昊, 闫磊, 李瑜娇, 王佳琪, 李钊, 刘巍, 艾鑫, 马迁驰, 王晓光, 钟超, 任婧瑶, 刘喜波, 赵姝丽, 张鹤, 赵新华, 蒋春姬, 王婧, 于海秋. 高油酸和普通花生萌发期抗旱筛选评价体系的建立[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(12): 3266-3280.
[11] 魏琦, 何冠华, 张登峰, 李永祥, 刘旭洋, 唐怀君, 刘成, 王天宇, 黎裕, 路运才, 李春辉. 基于抗旱玉米自交系SL001的抗旱优异基因资源挖掘[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(12): 3171-3183.
[12] 刘永惠, 沈一, 沈悦, 梁满, 沙琴, 张旭尧, 陈志德. 花生干旱诱导型启动子AhMYB44-11-Pro的克隆与功能分析[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(9): 2157-2166.
[13] 李闻娟, 王利民, 齐燕妮, 赵玮, 谢亚萍, 党照, 赵丽蓉, 李雯, 徐晨梦, 王琰, 张建平. 亚麻LuWRI1a在旱盐胁迫响应中的功能分析[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(7): 1750-1761.
[14] 乔志新, 张杰道, 王雨, 郭启芳, 刘燕静, 陈蕊, 胡文浩, 孙爱清. 干旱胁迫下冬小麦不同品种萌发特性差异的研究[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(6): 1568-1583.
[15] 王丽平, 王晓钰, 傅竞也, 王强. 玉米转录因子ZmMYB12提高植物抗旱性和低磷耐受性的功能鉴定[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(1): 76-88.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!