欢迎访问作物学报，今天是
作物学报

作物学报 ›› 2017, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (08): 1205-1215.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.01205

• 耕作栽培·生理生化 • 上一篇    下一篇

苗期耐低氮基因型苦荞的筛选及其评价指标

张楚1,张永清1,2,*,路之娟1,刘丽琴1   

  1. 1山西师范大学生命科学学院, 山西临汾 041004; 2山西师范大学地理科学学院, 山西临汾 041004
  • 收稿日期:2017-01-18 修回日期:2017-05-10 出版日期:2017-08-12 网络出版日期:2017-05-19
  • 通讯作者: 张永清, E-mail: yqzhang208@126.com
  • 基金资助:

    本研究由国家自然科学基金项目(31571604)资助。

Screening FagopyrumtararicumGenotypes Tolerant to Low Nitrogen Stress at Seedling Stageand Its Evaluating Indices

ZHANG Chu1,ZHANG Yong-Qing1,2,*,LU Zhi-Juan1,LIU Li-Qin1   

  1. 1College of Life Science, Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004, China; 2College of Geographical Science, Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004, China
  • Received:2017-01-18 Revised:2017-05-10 Published:2017-08-12 Published online:2017-05-19
  • Contact: Zhang yongqing, E-mail: yqzhang208@126.com
  • Supported by:

    The study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31571604).

RichHTML

PDF

692

被引次数

2

摘要：

土壤缺氮是造成我国黄土高原冷凉地区农业低产的主要原因。为了筛选耐低氮苦荞基因型及适宜鉴定指标，采用苗期水培方式，测定9个不同基因型苦荞在不同氮水平下的农艺性状、生理特性及植株氮素利用等指标进行，采用隶属函数法计算各指标耐低氮指数，通过主成分分析与聚类分析评价各基因型苦荞综合耐低氮能力。结果表明，低氮胁迫下，苦荞地上部生长受抑制程度大于根系，株高、茎粗、叶面积、地上部干重、根系体积、根系表面积及根系平均直径均呈下降趋势，主根长和根冠比呈上升趋势；根系活力、根系硝酸还原酶(NR)活性及可溶性蛋白含量有所下降，而根系超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)、过氧化物酶(POD)活性、丙二醛(MDA)、可溶性糖及游离脯氨酸含量有所升高；叶片叶绿素含量、Fm和Fv/Fm降低，而Fo升高；植株全氮含量及氮积累量降低，而由于植株氮积累量降幅明显大于生物量降幅，导致氮利用效率显著升高。将25个单项指标转化为4个相互独立的综合指标(累计贡献率达87.44%)，并将9个苦荞基因型划分为耐低氮型、中间型和不耐低氮型。为了预测苦荞基因型的耐低氮能力，将D值作因变量，各指标耐低氮指数作自变量进行逐步回归分析，建立最优回归方程，筛选出株高、茎粗、叶面积、根冠比、叶绿素含量、Fm、根系超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)活性及氮利用效率8项对苦荞耐低氮能力有显著影响的指标，并且9个苦荞基因型的苗期耐低氮能力预测值Y与D值显著相关(R2 = 0.998, P< 0.01)，表明这8个指标可用于耐低氮苦荞基因型的快速鉴定。

关键词: 苦荞, 耐低氮能力, 综合评价, 回归分析

Abstract:

Nitrogen (N) deficiency is a major problem for agricultural production in the cold area of Loess Plateau. In this, multiple indices of seedlings, including agronomic traits, physiological characteristics, and N utilization parameters, were measured in a hydroponics experiment with nine F. genotypes. The low-N tolerance was assessedby: calculating subordinatefunction values, and making the comprehensive evaluation after principal component and clustering analyses. Under low-N stress, the restraintdegree was greater forshoots than for roots.Compared with normal-N supply, low-N stress resulted in decreases of plant height, stem diameter, leaf area, shoot dry weight, root average diameter, root volume and root surface area and increases of main root length and root-to-shoot ratio. In addition, the root activity, nitrate reductase (NR) activity and soluble protein content decreased under low-N stress, whereas the activities of superoxide dismutase (SOD)and peroxidase (POD) as well as the contents of malonaldehyde (MDA), soluble sugar and free prolineincreased. The photosynthesis-related indices also changed under low-N stress, showing the decreases of leaf chlorophyll content, Fm and Fv/Fm and the increase ofFo. Theplant N contentand plant N accumulation decreased under low-N condition, however, the plant N utilization efficiency showed obvious increase, owing to the greater decline of N accumulation than that of plant biomass.The 25 single indices were converted intofour independent comprehensive indices (accumulative contribution of 87.44%), with which the nine F.genotypes were classified into high-, medium- and low-tolerance groups.An optimal equation was also set up to evaluate and predict low-N tolerance of F. genotypesthrough stepwise regression with D value as the dependent variable and low-N tolerance index as the independent variable. Finally, eight indices, plant height, stem diameter, leaf area, root-shoot ratio, chlorophyll content, Fm, root activity and plant N utilization efficiency,were selected due to their significant impacts on low-N tolerance. These indices are recommended in quick by screening low-N tolerant F.genotypes.tararicumtararicumtararicumtararicum

Key words: Fagopyrumtararicum, Low nitrogen tolerance, Comprehensiveevaluation, Regression analysis

[1]张定一,张永清,杨武德,苗果园.不同基因型小麦对低氮胁迫的生物学响应.作物学报,2006,32:1349–1354
Zhang D Y, Zhang Y Q. Biological response of roots in different wheat genotypes to low-N stress. Acta Agron Sin, 2006, 32: 1349–1354 (in Chinese with English abstract)
[2]Diaz C, Salibacolombani V, Loudet O. Leaf yellowing and anthocyanin accumulation are two genetically independent strategies in response to nitrogen limitation in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol, 2006, 47: 74–83
[3]李强,罗延宏,谭杰,孔凡磊,杨世民,袁继超.玉米杂交种苗期耐低氮指标的筛选与综合评价.中国生态农业学报,2014,22:1190–1199
 Li Q, Luo Y H, Tan J, Kong F L, Yang S M, Yuan J C. Indexes screening and comprehensive evaluation of low nitrogen tolerance of hybrid maize cultivar at seeding stage. ChinJ Eco-Agric, 2014, 22:1190–1199(in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]李春艳,张宏,马龙,李诚.冬小麦苗期氮素吸收利用生理指标的综合评价.植物营养与肥料学报,2012,18:523–530
Li C Y, Zhang H, Ma L, Li C. Comprehensive evaluation on physiological indices of nitrogen absorption and utilization in winter wheat at the stage. J Plant NutrFert, 2012, 18: 523–530(in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]赵化田,王瑞芳,许云峰,安调过.小麦苗期耐低氮基因型的筛选与评价.中国生态农业学报,2011,19:1199–1204
Zhao H T, Wang R F, Xu Y F, An DG. Screening and evaluating low nitrogen tolerant wheat genotype at seeding stage. Chin J Eco-Agric, 2011,19: 1199–1204(in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]Calderónmontaño J M, Burgosmorón E, Pérezguerrero C, López-Lázaro, M. A review on the dietary flavonoid kaempferol. Mini Rev Med Chem, 2011, 11:298–344
[7]张雄,王立祥,柴岩,廖允成.小杂粮生产可持续发展探讨.中国农业科学,2003,36:1595–1598
Zhang X, Wang L X, Chai Y, Liao Y C. Sustainable development of minor crops in China.Sci Agric Sin, 2003, 36: 1595–1598(in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]赵刚,唐宇,王安虎.苦荞麦的成分功能研究与开发应用.四川农业大学学报,2001,19:355–358
Zhao G, Tang Y, Wang A H. The function research and application development of the composition for tartary buckwheat. J Sichuan Agric Univ, 2001, 19: 355–358(in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]侯雅君,张宗文,吴斌,李艳琴.苦荞种质资源AFLP标记遗传多样性分析.中国农业科学,2009,42:4166–4174
Hou Y J, Zhang Z W, Wu B, Li Y Q. Genetic diversity in tartary buckwheat revealed by AFLP analysis.Sci Agric Sin, 2009,42:4166–4174(in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]杨玉霞,吴卫,郑有良,王俊,李建,邬昌禄.苦荞品种(系)主要农艺性状与蛋白质含量的聚类分析.种子,2008,27(10):30–34
 Yang Y X, Wu W, Zheng Y L, Wang J, Li J, Wu C L. Cluster analysis of the mainly agronomic characters and the protein content on tartary uckwheat. Seed, 2008,27(10):30–34(in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]Shi Y H, Zhang Y Q. Effect of seed soaking with rare earth on the seed germination and seeding growth of tartary buckwheat under different water conditions. Agric SciTechnol, 2013, 14: 1237–1243
[12]田秀英,王正银.硒对苦荞产量、营养与保健品质的影响.作物学报,2008,34:1266–1272
Tian X Y, Wang Z Y. Effects of selenium application on yield and qualities for nutrition and health care in tartary buckwheat. Acta Agron Sin,2008, 34:1266–1272(in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]张志良,翟伟菁,李小芳.植物生理学实验指导(第4版).北京:高等教育出版社,2009. pp30–227
    Zhang Z L,Zhai W J, Li X F. Experimental Instruction of Plant Physiology, 4nd edn. Beijing: High Education Press, 2009. pp30-227 (in Chinese)
[14]鲍士旦.土壤农化分析(第2版).北京:中国农业出版社,1986. pp 213-216
    Bao S D. Soil Agro-chemistrical Analysis, 2nd edn. Beijing: China Agricultural Press, 1986. pp 213–216 (in Chinese)
[15]张美俊,乔治军,杨武德,冯美臣,肖璐洁,王冠,段云.不同糜子品种对低氮胁迫的生物学响应.植物营养与肥料学报,2014,20:661–669
Zhang M J, Qiao Z J, Yang W D. Biological response of different cultivars of millet to low-N stress.J Plant NutrFert,2014, 20:661-669(in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]谢孟林,李强,查丽,朱敏,程秋博,袁继超,孔凡磊.低氮胁迫对不同耐低氮性玉米品种幼苗根系形态和生理特征的影响.中国生态农业学报,2015,23:946–953
   Xie M L, Li Q, Zha L, Zhu M, Cheng Q B, Yuan J C, Kong F L. Effects of low nitrogen stress on physiological and morphological traits of roots of different low nitrogen tolerance maize varieties at seeding stage. Chin J Eco-Agric, 2015,23:946–953(in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]陈二影,杨延兵,秦岭,张华文,刘宾,王海莲,陈桂玲,于淑婷,管延安.谷子苗期氮高效品种筛选及相关特性分析.中国农业科学,2016,49:3287–3297
    Chen E Y, Yang Y B, Qin L, Zhang H W, Liu B, Wang H L, Chen G L, Yu S T, Guan Y A. Evaluation of nitrogen efficient cultivars of foxtail millet and analysis of the related characters at seeding stage. Sci Agric Sin, 2016, 49:3287–3297(in Chinese with English abstract)
[1] 胡亮亮, 王素华, 王丽侠, 程须珍, 陈红霖. 绿豆种质资源苗期耐盐性鉴定及耐盐种质筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(2): 367-379.
[2] 宋丽君, 聂晓玉, 何磊磊, 蒯婕, 杨华, 郭安国, 黄俊生, 傅廷栋, 汪波, 周广生. 饲用大豆品种耐荫性鉴定指标筛选及综合评价[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(9): 1741-1752.
[3] 张鹤, 蒋春姬, 殷冬梅, 董佳乐, 任婧瑶, 赵新华, 钟超, 王晓光, 于海秋. 花生耐冷综合评价体系构建及耐冷种质筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(9): 1753-1767.
[4] 高震, 梁效贵, 张莉, 赵雪, 杜雄, 崔彦宏, 周顺利. 不同时期灌溉对华北平原春玉米穗粒数的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(7): 1324-1331.
[5] 方彦杰, 张绪成, 侯慧芝, 于显枫, 王红丽, 马一凡, 张国平, 雷康宁. 全膜覆土种植和施肥对旱地苦荞耗水特征及产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(6): 1149-1161.
[6] 张力岚, 张列梅, 牛焕颖, 徐益, 李玉, 祁建民, 陶爱芬, 方平平, 张立武. 黄麻SSR标记与纤维产量性状的相关性[J]. 作物学报, 2020, 46(12): 1905-1913.
[7] 陈二影, 王润丰, 秦岭, 杨延兵, 黎飞飞, 张华文, 王海莲, 刘宾, 孔清华, 管延安. 谷子芽期耐盐碱综合鉴定及评价[J]. 作物学报, 2020, 46(10): 1591-1604.
[8] 郜欢欢,叶桑,王倩,王刘艳,王瑞莉,陈柳依,唐章林,李加纳,周清元,崔翠. 甘蓝型油菜种子萌发期耐铝毒特性综合评价及其种质筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(9): 1416-1430.
[9] 纪龙,申红芳,徐春春,陈中督,方福平. 基于非线性主成分分析的绿色超级稻品种综合评价[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(7): 982-992.
[10] 崔翠,程闯,赵愉风,郜欢欢,王瑞莉,王刘艳,周清元. 52份豌豆种质萌发期耐铝毒性的综合评价与筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(5): 798-805.
[11] 苑乂川, 陈小雨, 李明明, 李萍, 贾亚涛, 韩渊怀, 邢国芳. 谷子苗期耐低磷种质筛选及其根系保护酶系统对低磷胁迫的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(4): 601-612.
[12] 张海燕,解备涛,汪宝卿,董顺旭,段文学,张立明. 不同甘薯品种抗旱性评价及耐旱指标筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(3): 419-430.
[13] 李鹏程,毕真真,梁文君,孙超,张俊莲,白江平. DNA甲基化参与调控马铃薯干旱胁迫响应[J]. 作物学报, 2019, 45(10): 1595-1603.
[14] 王倩,崔翠,叶桑,崔明圣,赵愉风,林呐,唐章林,李加纳,周清元. 甘蓝型油菜种子萌发期耐苯磺隆种质筛选与综合评价[J]. 作物学报, 2018, 44(8): 1169-1184.
[15] 段文学,张海燕,解备涛,汪宝卿,张立明. 甘薯苗期耐盐性鉴定及其指标筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2018, 44(8): 1237-1247.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

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