根际通气状况对盐胁迫下棉花幼苗生长的影响

doi:10.11983/CBB15007

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以溶液培养的棉花(Gossypium hirsutum)幼苗为材料, 测定了不同盐胁迫程度和不同通气状况下棉花幼苗株高、根系体积、根系和茎叶生物量以及灰分含量的变化, 以探索根际通气状况对盐胁迫下棉花生长的影响。结果表明, 盐胁迫抑制棉花植株生长, 表现为植株变矮、叶面积减小和干物质积累下降; 根际环境通气不良也会导致棉花幼苗生长受抑制、干物质积累下降和矿质元素吸收减少等。进一步比较盐胁迫和根际通气状况及两者组合作用对棉苗生长的影响, 发现盐胁迫对株高和总生物量的影响较大, 而根际通气状况对根系体积、根系生物量、根冠比和矿质元素吸收的影响较大。总体表现为: 盐胁迫对茎叶生长的不利影响较大, 而根际通气状况对根系生长的不利影响较大。同时, 在根际环境通气良好的条件下, 不同程度盐胁迫导致的棉花幼苗株高、根系体积、叶面积、根系生物量和总生物量的变化程度远小于根际环境通气不良条件下的变化程度。实验结果表明, 根际环境通气良好可以减弱盐胁迫对棉花生长发育的抑制作用, 而根际环境通气不良则会加重盐胁迫的不利影响。

关键词: 棉花, 根际通气, 盐胁迫, 生长

Abstract: We examined the effect of rhizosphere ventilation and salt stress on the growth of cotton seedings cultivated in nutrient solution. The changes in plant height, root volume, shoot and root biomasses as well as ash content in cotton seedlings were examined to investigate the effect of rhizosphere ventilation on the growth of cotton under salt stress. Salt stress inhibited the growth of cotton and led to decreased plant height, leaf area and dry weight; poor ventilation also decreased plant height, dry weight and mineral element absorption. A further comparison of the effect of rhizosphere ventilation and the combined effect of rhizosphere ventilation with salt stress showed a prominent effect of salt stress on plant height and total biomass, with a striking effect of rhizosphere ventilation on root volume, root biomass, root-to-shoot ratio and mineral element absorption (i.e., the adverse effect of salt stress was mainly exhibited on stems and leaves, and that of rhizosphere ventilation on root growth). In addition, the variation in cotton seedlings in terms of plant height, root volume, leaf area, root biomass and total biomass in the rhizosphere ventilation conditions was smaller than those in seedlings without ventilation. Rhizosphere ventilation could increase plantlet height, leaf area, dry weight, thereby alleviating the adverse effect of salt stresses.

Key words: cotton, rhizosphere ventilation, salt stress, growth

祁琳, 柏新富, 牛玮浩, 张振华. 根际通气状况对盐胁迫下棉花幼苗生长的影响. 植物学报, 2016, 51(1): 16-23.

Lin Qi, Xinfu Bai, Weihao Niu, Zhenhua Zhang. Effect of Rhizosphere Ventilation on Growth of Cotton Seedlings Under Salt Stress. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2016, 51(1): 16-23.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.chinbullbotany.com/CN/10.11983/CBB15007

https://www.chinbullbotany.com/CN/Y2016/V51/I1/16

图/表 7

图1 各处理培养液中氧气含量的变化 A: 通气+0 mmol·L-1 NaCl; B: 不通气+0 mmol·L-1 NaCl; C: 通气+100 mmol·L-1 NaCl; D: 不通气+100 mmol·L-1 NaCl; E: 通气+200 mmol·L-1 NaCl; F: 不通气+200 mmol·L-1 NaCl

Figure 1 Changes in O2 content in culture solutions of different treatmentsA: Aeration+0 mmol·L-1 NaCl; B: No aeration+0 mmol·L-1 NaCl; C: Aeration+100 mmol·L-1 NaCl; D: No aeration+100 mmol·L-1 NaCl; E: Aeration+200 mmol·L-1 NaCl; F: No aeration+200 mmol·L-1 NaCl

图2 各处理棉花株高(A)和根体积(B)的增加值 A-F同图1。不同小写字母表示各处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。

Figure 2 Comparison of the increments in plant height (A) and root volume (B) in different treatmentsA-F see Figure 1. Significant differences (P<0.05) were indicated with different lowercase letters.

表1 盐胁迫和通气状况对棉花幼苗生理指标影响的方差分析

Table 1 Analysis of the variance of the physiological indices in cotton seedlings under salt stress and ventilation

Sources of variation		Plant height	Root volume	Single leaf area	Specific leaf area	Total biomass	Root biomass	Root-shoot ratio	Ash content
Salt concention	F value	174.56	43.42	91.43	2.56	106.84	61.75	24.40	89.03
Salt concention	P	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.943	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
Ventilation	F value	16.63	360.63	416.34	16.33	67.76	236.02	349.23	724.15
Ventilation	P	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
Interaction	F value	11.47	22.15	2.99	5.73	4.48	9.02	13.69	10.50
Interaction	P	0.000	0.000	0.065	0.008	0.020	0.001	0.000	0.000

表2 盐胁迫在不同通气状况下导致的棉花幼苗各指标变异程度

Table 2 The salt stress resulted variance of the indices in cotton seedlings under different ventilation

Parameters	Aeration			No aeration
Parameters	Maximum value	Minimum value	Coefficient of variability	Maximum value	Minimum value	Coefficient of variability
Plant height (cm)	16.40±2.09	8.56±0.89	31.57	17.06±1.20	3.84±0.67	62.66
Root volume (cm³·plantlet^-1)	11.40±1.45	7.98±2.05	17.54	6.60±0.87	1.18±0.15	79.39
Single leaf area (cm²)	137.78±6.18	109.39±10.22	11.52	101.73±6.26	60.93±5.46	24.90
Specific leaf area (cm²·g^-1)	342.82±20.83	332.69±24.60	1.56	337.02±24.02	279.85±16.62	9.95
Total biomass (g·plantlet^-1)	4.91±0.35	3.28±0.24	15.14	4.47±0.34	2.28±0.18	22.13
Root biomass (g·plantlet^-1)	1.11±0.11	0.85±0.04	11.25	0.86±0.05	0.46±0.04	21.94
Root-shoot ratio	0.35±0.01	0.29±0.02	7.07	0.25±0.01	0.23±0.01	2.85
Ash content (%)	13.18±0.27	11.41±0.14	7.23	10.55±0.24	9.69±0.24	4.31

图3 不同处理下棉花成熟叶叶面积(A)和比叶面积(B)的比较 A-F同图1。不同小写字母表示各处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。

Figure 3 Comparison of the increments in single leaf area (A) and specific leaf area (B) in different treatmentsA-F see Figure 1. Significant differences (P<0.05) were indicated with different lowercase letters.

图4 各处理棉花植株茎叶、根和总生物量(A)及根-冠比(B) A-F同图1。不同小写字母表示各处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。

Figure 4 Comparison of shoot/root/total biomass (A) and root-shoot ratio (B) in different treatments A-F see Figure 1. Significant differences (P<0.05) were indicated with different lowercase letters.

图5 各处理棉花植株的灰分含量 A-F同图1。不同小写字母表示各处理间差异显著(P<0.05)。

Figure 5 Comparison of the increments in ash content in different treatments A-F see Figure 1. Significant differences (P<0.05) were indicated with different lowercase letters.

参考文献 31

1	白团辉, 马锋旺, 李翠英, 束怀瑞, 韩明玉, 王昆 (2008). 苹果砧木幼苗对根际低氧胁迫的生理响应及耐性分析. 中国农业科学 41, 4140-4148.
2	柏新富, 卜庆梅, 谭永芹, 朱建军, 刘林德 (2012). NaCl对渗透胁迫下三角叶滨藜光合作用和水分状况的调节. 植物学报 47, 500-507.
3	陈庆彬, 雷凯健, 赵航, 郭莉, 安国勇 (2014). 一种适于营养胁迫研究的拟南芥水培方法. 植物学报 49, 462-468.
4	代建龙, 卢合全, 李振怀, 段留生, 董合忠 (2013). 盐胁迫下施肥对棉花生长及氮素利用的影响. 应用生态学报 24, 3453-3458.
5	郭超, 牛文全 (2010). 根际通气对盆栽玉米生长与根系活力的影响. 中国生态农业学报 18, 1194-1198.
6	李奕林 (2012). 水稻根系通气组织与根系泌氧及根际硝化作用的关系. 生态学报 32, 2066-2074.
7	刘义玲, 孙周平, 李天来 (2013). 根际低氧胁迫对网纹甜瓜果期根系氮代谢的影响. 生态学杂志 32, 2332-2338.
8	娄成后, 白克智, 宋茂山 (1964). 高等植物幼苗茎叶向根系运输氧气的研究——I. 茎叶向根系运氧的数量. 科学通报 6, 537-541.
9	潘澜, 薛立 (2012). 植物淹水胁迫的生理学机制研究进展. 生态学杂志 31, 2662-2672.
10	生利霞, 冯立国, 束怀瑞 (2011). 低氧胁迫下钙对樱桃根系功能及氮代谢的影响. 生态学杂志 30, 2209-2213.
11	孙运朋, 陈小兵, 张振华, 吴从稳, 颜坤, 张立华 (2013). 滨海棉田土壤盐分时空分布特征研究. 土壤学报 50, 891-899.
12	王汝镛, 武志杰, 曹承绵, 刘永恩, 张素君, 张岫岚, 王春裕, 田林杰 (2011). 近代黄河三角洲东营农业综合试验区的滨海盐渍土及其改良利用的研究. I. 土壤类型与性质. 土壤通报 32, 3-7.
13	王树凤, 胡韵雪, 孙海菁, 施翔, 潘红伟, 陈益泰 (2014). 盐胁迫对2种栎树苗期生长和根系生长发育的影响. 生态学报34, 1021-1029.
14	杨鹏, 胥晓 (2012). 淹水胁迫对青杨雌雄幼苗生理特性和生长的影响. 植物生态学报 36, 81-87.
15	弋良朋, 王祖伟 (2011). 盐胁迫下3种滨海盐生植物的根系生长和分布. 生态学报 31, 1195-1202.
16	曾小平, 蔡锡安, 赵平, 饶兴权 (2009). 广东鹤山人工林群落主要优势植物的热值和灰分含量. 应用生态学报 20, 485-492.
17	中国农业科学院棉花研究所 (2013). 中国棉花栽培学. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社. pp.101-114.
18	Bernstein N, Meiri A, Zilberstaine M (2004). Root growth of avocado is more sensitive to salinity than shoot growth.J Am Soc Hortic Sci 129, 188-192.
19	Grichko VP, Glick BR (2001). Ethylene and flooding stress in plants.Plant Physiol Bioch 39, 1-9.
20	Grzesiaka S, Grzesiaka MT, Huraa T, Marcińskaa I, Rzepka A (2013). Changes in root system structure, leaf water potential and gas exchange of maize and triticale seedlings affected by soil compaction.Environ Exp Bot 88, 2-10.
21	Horchani F, Khayati H, Raymond P, Brouquisse R, Aschi-Smiti S (2009). Contrasted effects of prolonged root hypoxia on tomato root and fruit (Solanum lycopersicum) metabolism.J Agron Crop Sci 195, 313-318.
22	Jackson MB (2008). Ethylene-promoted elongation: an adaptation to submergence stress.Ann Bot 101, 229-248.
23	Link KHR, Weng CC, Lo HF, Chen JT (2004). Study of the root antioxidative system of tomatoes and eggplants under waterlogged conditions.Plant Sci 167, 355-365.
24	Mano Y, Omori F (2013). Relationship between constitutive root aerenchyma formation and flooding tolerance in Zea nicaraguensis.Plant Soil 370, 447-460.
25	Maryam A, Nasreen S (2012). A review: water logging effects on morphological, anatomical, physiological and biochemical attributes of food and cash crops.Int J Water Resour Environ Sci 1, 113-120.
26	Mi YF, Ma XW, Chen SC (2013). Resistant evaluation of kiwifruit rootstocks to root zone hypoxia stress.Am J Plant Sci 4, 945-954.
27	Nakano Y (2007). Response of tomato root systems to environmental stress under soilless culture.Jpn Agri Res Q 41, 7-15.
28	Niu WQ, Jia ZX, Zhang X, Shao HB (2012). Effects of soil rhizosphere aeration on the root growth and water absorption of tomato.Clean-Soil Air Water 40, 1364-1371.
29	Pushpalatha G, Subrahmanyam D, Sreenu K, Ram T, Subbarao LV, Parmar B, Giri A, Sarla N, Rai V (2013). Effect of salt stress on seedling growth and antioxidant enzymes in two contrasting rice introgression lines.Indian J Plant Physiol 18, 360-366.
30	Shimamura S, Yamamoto R, Nakamura T, Shimada S, Komatsu S (2010). Stem hypertrophic lenticels and secondary aerenchyma enable oxygen transport to roots of soybean in flooded soil.Ann Bot 106, 277-284.
31	Voesenek LACJ, Sasidharan R (2013). Ethylene-and oxygen signaling-drive plant survival during flooding.Plant Biol 15, 426-435.

[1]	林琳琳, 肖劲祥, 黄深深, 赵杨梅, 张德旭, 程毅康, 龙文兴. 磷添加对热带云雾林幼苗及幼树功能性状的影响[J]. , 2026, 50(预发表): 0-.
[2]	胡光明, 欧旭, 龙文兴. 热带云雾林宿主树皮粗糙度对附生维管植物多样性与孢子定殖的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(预发表): 1-.
[3]	王林旭, 钱尼澎, 李港墩, 刘琪璟. 红松和蒙古栎径向生长季节动态及其对非结构性碳的响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(预发表): 1-.
[4]	姜庆宏, 丁露, 王哲, 郑春丽, 冯昭绰. 丛枝菌根真菌与不同功能细菌联用对苜蓿的促生作用[J]. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(3): 774-788.
[5]	任曦彤, 李颖, 张雨, 熊胡安赫, 张蕊科, 祁珊珊, 戴志聪, 杜道林. 丛枝菌根真菌与凋落物互作有助于加拿大一枝黄花应对营养胁迫[J]. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(3): 710-721.
[6]	朱梦璇, 刘渊, 赵颢宇, 巩薇, 孙振云, 党振华. 荒漠植物红砂AP2/ERF基因家族鉴定及在盐胁迫下的表达模式[J]. 植物学报, 2026, 61(3): 449-461.
[7]	张诚航, 卫星, 吴纯泽, 王裕尧, 李浩楠. 大气还原态氮干湿沉降下水曲柳和兴安落叶松菌根化苗木生长响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(3): 649-659.
[8]	刘欣宇, 戴思兰. 生长素响应因子(ARFs)介导的植物花器官发育调控网络与作用机制[J]. 植物学报, 2026, 61(3): 369-385.
[9]	李新貌, 金光泽, 刘志理. 毛榛“小枝系统”生长与防御策略的季节动态和器官差异[J]. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(2): 293-305.
[10]	郝雅昕, 金光泽, 刘志理. 生长季不同阶段和枝龄对常绿针叶树种枝性状的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(2): 279-292.
[11]	梁天豪, 吴帆, 黄锦学, 景陈鸿, 傅贺菁, 杨智杰, 熊德成. 增温对中亚热带格氏栲天然林细根生长量及形态特征的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(1): 94-106.
[12]	郝欢欢, 李丹, 郭子华, 周澳, 李彦颉, 杨亮, 张冉, 卢英帅, 赵祥, 陈晓鹏. 盐胁迫对长穗偃麦草根系分泌氨基酸及其衍生物的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(1): 202-212.
[13]	李淑英, 朱加保, 马艳, 徐道青, 阚画春, 陈敏, 刘小玲, 郑曙峰, 马小艳. 牛筋草对棉花的密度竞争和防治临界期[J]. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(1): 134-149.
[14]	李港墩, 钱尼澎, 王林旭, 董淳超, 刘琪璟. 长白山红松和春榆径向生长季节动态对环境因子的响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2025, 49(7): 1110-1118.
[15]	平晓燕, 杜毅倩, 赖仕蓉, 孔梦桥, 余国杰. 植物应对食草动物采食的化学防御策略研究进展[J]. 植物生态学报, 2025, 49(5): 667-680.