Effects of Deficit Irrigation on the Photosynthetic and Physiological Characteristics of Leaves and Yield of Isatis tinctoria

doi:10.11983/CBB20056

Abstract

Abstract: Taking the Isatis tinctoria as research crop, the field water control experiment was carried out in an arid oasis of the middle of the Hexi Corridor in 2018, and deficit levels included slight, moderate, severe water deficit (WD) and suitable irrigation, the influences of WD on physiological parameters, irrigation volume, yield and quality of Isatis tinctoria were studied with drip irrigation and plastic mulch, which would provide the theoretical basis for the establishment of irrigation management strategy of I. tinctoria in Hexi area. The results showed that WD treatment during the vegetative and fleshy root growth stages reduced the leaf photosynthetic rate (P_n), transpiration rate (T_r), and stomatal conductance (G_s), and with the higher degree of WD, the greater the decrease. Slight WD treatment had no significant effects on leaf photosynthetic capacity, and yield as compared with control, but the rest of treatment led to varying degrees of decrease in leaf photosynthetic capacity and yield. Fitting the relationship between the irrigation amount and the yield showed a quadratic parabola, which demonstrated that the yield did not enhance along with the increase of the irrigation amount. In conclusion, under-mulched drip irrigation WD reduces photosynthetic capacity of I. tinctoria leaves, while slight WD irrigation applied during the vegetative growth period saves irrigation water and improves yield and irrigation water use efficiency.

Key words: Isatis tinctoria, deficit irrigation, photosynthetic physiological characteristics, yield

Zeyi Wang, Hengjia Zhang, Yucai Wang, Xietian Chen, Yuchun Ba. Effects of Deficit Irrigation on the Photosynthetic and Physiological Characteristics of Leaves and Yield of Isatis tinctoria[J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2020, 55(6): 705-714.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.chinbullbotany.com/EN/10.11983/CBB20056

https://www.chinbullbotany.com/EN/Y2020/V55/I6/705

Figures/Tables 6

References 40

[1]	柏军华, 王克如, 初振东, 陈兵, 李少昆 (2005). 叶面积测定方法的比较研究. 石河子大学学报(自然科学版) 23, 216-218.
[2]	蔡焕杰, 康绍忠, 张振华, 柴红敏, 胡笑涛, 王健 (2000). 作物调亏灌溉的适宜时间与调亏程度的研究. 农业工程学报 16(3), 24-27.
[3]	董浩, 毕军, 夏光利, 周勋波, 陈雨海 (2014). 灌溉和种植方式对冬小麦生育后期旗叶光合特性及产量的影响. 应用生态学报 25, 2259-2266.
[4]	杜宗绪, 刘英, 高嗣慧 (2005). 板蓝根栽培与贮藏加工新技术. 北京: 中国农业出版社. pp. 7-10.
[5]	房玉林, 孙伟, 万力, 惠竹梅, 刘旭, 张振文 (2013). 调亏灌溉对酿酒葡萄生长及果实品质的影响. 中国农业科学 46, 2730-2738.
[6]	郭巧生 (2009). 药用植物栽培学北京: 高等教育出版社. pp. 26-33.
[7]	韩占江, 于振文, 王东, 王西芝, 许振柱 (2009). 调亏灌溉对冬小麦耗水特性和水分利用效率的影响. 应用生态学报 20, 2671-2677.
[8]	侯格平, 甄东升, 姜青龙, 焦阳 (2015). 民乐县板蓝根高产优质栽培试验研究. 农业科技通讯 (9), 132-134.
[9]	黄兴法, 李光永, 王小伟, 曾德超, 孙乃健 (2001). 充分灌与调亏灌溉条件下苹果树微喷灌的耗水量研究. 农业工程学报 17(5), 43-47.
[10]	寇丹, 苏德荣, 吴迪, 李岩 (2014). 地下调亏滴灌对紫花苜蓿耗水、产量和品质的影响. 农业工程学报 30, 116-123.
[11]	梁建萍, 贾小云, 刘亚令, 吴云, 周然, 冯前进 (2016). 干旱胁迫对蒙古黄芪生长及根部次生代谢物含量的影响. 生态学报 36, 4415-4422.
[12]	刘长利, 王文全 (2008). 干旱胁迫对甘草酸积累影响的物质组分分配研究. 中国中药杂志 33, 2852-2853.
[13]	刘小飞, 李彪, 孟兆江, 刘祖贵, 张寄阳 (2019). 隔沟调亏灌溉对冬小麦旗叶生理特性与产量形成的影响. 农业机械学报 50, 320-328.
[14]	刘译锴, 郑明珠, 马莉, 刘铁军, 杨有俊, 刘金荣 (2015). 调亏灌溉对多年生黑麦草光合特性的影响及阈值的确定. 草业科学 32, 570-580.
[15]	孟兆江, 段爱旺, 王晓森, 高阳, 申孝军 (2016). 调亏灌溉对棉花根冠生长关系的影响. 农业机械学报 47(4), 99-104.
[16]	孟兆江, 孙景生, 段爱旺, 刘祖贵, 王和洲 (2010). 调亏灌溉条件下冬小麦籽粒灌浆特征及其模拟模型. 农业工程学报 26, 18-23.
[17]	孟兆江, 孙景生, 刘祖贵, 王晓森, 王景雷, 高阳, 段爱旺 (2011). 调亏灌溉对冬小麦不同生育阶段光合速率的影响. 麦类作物学报 31, 1130-1135.
[18]	邵光成, 刘娜, 陈磊 (2008). 温室辣椒时空亏缺灌溉需水特性与产量的试验. 农业机械学报 39(4), 117-121.
[19]	时学双, 李法虎, 闫宝莹, 何东, 普布多吉, 曲珍 (2015). 不同生育期水分亏缺对春青稞水分利用和产量的影响. 农业机械学报 46(10), 144-151, 265.
[20]	唐昊 (2018). 中医药与养生保健探讨. 养生保健指南 (49), 282.
[21]	王瑞, 杨海英, 杨琪伟, 黄山君, 王峥涛 (2010). 板蓝根的质量标准研究. 中草药 41, 478-480.
[22]	王世杰, 张恒嘉, 巴玉春, 王玉才, 黄彩霞, 薛道信, 李福强 (2018). 调亏灌溉对膜下滴灌辣椒生长及水分利用的影响. 干旱地区农业研究 36(3), 31-38.
[23]	王玉才 (2018). 河西绿洲菘蓝水分高效利用及调亏灌溉模式优化研究. 博士论文. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学. pp. 59-63.
[24]	王玉才, 邓浩亮, 李福强, 王泽义, 张万恒, 黄彩霞, 张恒嘉 (2015). 调亏灌溉对菘蓝光合特性及品质的影响. 水土保持学报 31(6), 291-295, 325.
[25]	王玉才, 张恒嘉, 邓浩亮, 王世杰, 巴玉春 (2018). 调亏灌溉对菘蓝水分利用及产量的影响. 植物学报 53, 322-333.
[26]	武阳, 王伟, 赵智, 黄兴法, 范云涛, 苏柳芸 (2012). 调亏灌溉对香梨叶片光合速率及水分利用效率的影响. 农业机械学报 43(11), 80-86.
[27]	袁淑芬, 陈源泉, 闫鹏, 陶志强, 崔吉晓, 李超, 隋鹏 (2014). 水分胁迫对华北春玉米生育进程及物质生产力的影响. 中国农业大学学报 19(5), 22-28.
[28]	张恒嘉, 李晶 (2013). 绿洲膜下滴灌调亏马铃薯光合生理特性与水分利用. 农业机械学报 44(10), 143-151.
[29]	张凯, 陈年来, 韩国君, 张正 (2015). 调亏灌溉下番茄叶片气体交换日变化和光响应特性. 中国沙漠 35, 923-929.
[30]	郑健, 蔡焕杰, 陈新明, 王健 (2009). 调亏灌溉对温室小型西瓜水分利用效率及品质的影响. 核农学报 23, 159-164.
[31]	周丽, 王永明, 周达, 罗延丽, 张新慧 (2015). 干旱胁迫对银柴胡药材活性成分含量的影响研究. 时珍国医国药 26, 1463-1465.
[32]	邹慧, 黄兴法, 龚时宏 (2012). 水分调亏对地下滴灌夏玉米田水热动态的影响. 农业机械学报 43(9), 72-77.
[33]	Hooshmand M, Albaji M, Nasab SB, Ansari NA (2019). The effect of deficit irrigation on yield and yield components of greenhouse tomato ( Solanum lycopersicum) in hydroponic culture in Ahvaz region, Iran. Sci Hortic 254, 84-90.
[34]	Moradi P, Ford-Lloyd B, Pritchard J (2014). Plant-water responses of different medicinal plant thyme ( Thymus spp.) species to drought stress condition. Aust J Crop Sci 8, 666-673.
[35]	Özmen S, Kanber R, Sarı N, Ünlü M (2015). The effects of deficit irrigation on nitrogen consumption, yield, and quality in drip irrigated grafted and ungrafted watermelon. J Integr Agric 14, 966-976.
[36]	Selahvarzi Y, Zamani Z, Fatahi R, Talaei AR (2017). Effect of deficit irrigation on flowering and fruit properties of pomegranate ( Punica granatum cv. Shahvar). Agric Water Manage 192, 189-197.
[37]	Sezen SM, Yazar A, Tekin S (2019). Physiological response of red pepper to different irrigation regimes under drip irrigation in the Mediterranean region of Turkey. Sci Hortic 245, 280-288.
[38]	Trentacoste ER, Calderón FJ, Contreras-Zanessi O, Galarza W, Banco AP, Puertas CM (2019). Effect of regulated deficit irrigation during the vegetative growth period on shoot elongation and oil yield components in olive hedgerows (cv. Arbosana) pruned annually on alternate sides in San Juan, Argentina. Irrigation Sci 37, 533-546.
[39]	Zhao Z, Wang W, Wu Y, Xu MX, Huang XF, Ma YJ, Ren DX (2015). Leaf physiological responses of mature pear trees to regulated deficit irrigation in field conditions under desert climate. Sci Hortic 187, 122-130.
[40]	Zhou Q, Ju CX, Wang ZQ, Zhang H, Liu LJ, Yang JC, Zhang JH (2017). Grain yield and water use efficiency of super rice under soil water deficit and alternate wetting and drying irrigation. J Integr Agric 16, 1028-1043.

Month	Maximum temperature (°C)	Minimum temperature (°C)	Ground temperature (°C)	Precipitation (mm)	Daylight hours (h)	Wind speed (m·s^-1)	Relative humidity (%)
5	19.5	5.8	19.1	20.0	279.3	3.2	41
6	23.1	11.5	23.9	32.8	223.4	3.0	49
7	25.2	12.7	23.2	60.4	238.2	2.8	64
8	22.4	12.3	20.7	53.9	167.7	2.5	72
9	16.8	5.9	14.1	50.2	227.8	2.8	61
10	11.8	-1.1	7.1	4.9	277.8	3.2	47

Month	Maximum temperature (°C)	Minimum temperature (°C)	Ground temperature (°C)	Precipitation (mm)	Daylight hours (h)	Wind speed (m·s^-1)	Relative humidity (%)
5	19.5	5.8	19.1	20.0	279.3	3.2	41
6	23.1	11.5	23.9	32.8	223.4	3.0	49
7	25.2	12.7	23.2	60.4	238.2	2.8	64
8	22.4	12.3	20.7	53.9	167.7	2.5	72
9	16.8	5.9	14.1	50.2	227.8	2.8	61
10	11.8	-1.1	7.1	4.9	277.8	3.2	47

Process number	Process name	Seedling (%)	Vegetative growth (%)	Fleshy root growth (%)	Fleshy root maturity (%)
V1G0	Vegetative growth stages with slight water deficit treatment	75-85	65-75	75-85	75-85
V2G0	Vegetative growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment	75-85	55-65	75-85	75-85
V3G0	Vegetative growth stages with severe water deficit treatment	75-85	45-55	75-85	75-85
V1G1	Vegetative growth stages with slight water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with slight water deficit treatment	75-85	65-75	65-75	75-85
V1G2	Vegetative growth stages with slight water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment	75-85	65-75	55-65	75-85
V2G1	Vegetative growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with slight water deficit treatment	75-85	55-65	65-75	75-85
V2G2	Vegetative growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment	75-85	55-65	55-65	75-85
V3G1	Vegetative growth stages with severe water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with slight water deficit treatment	75-85	45-55	65-75	75-85
V3G2	Vegetative growth stages with severe water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment	75-85	45-55	55-65	75-85
CK	Control treatment	75-85	75-85	75-85	75-85

Process number	Process name	Seedling (%)	Vegetative growth (%)	Fleshy root growth (%)	Fleshy root maturity (%)
V1G0	Vegetative growth stages with slight water deficit treatment	75-85	65-75	75-85	75-85
V2G0	Vegetative growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment	75-85	55-65	75-85	75-85
V3G0	Vegetative growth stages with severe water deficit treatment	75-85	45-55	75-85	75-85
V1G1	Vegetative growth stages with slight water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with slight water deficit treatment	75-85	65-75	65-75	75-85
V1G2	Vegetative growth stages with slight water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment	75-85	65-75	55-65	75-85
V2G1	Vegetative growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with slight water deficit treatment	75-85	55-65	65-75	75-85
V2G2	Vegetative growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment	75-85	55-65	55-65	75-85
V3G1	Vegetative growth stages with severe water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with slight water deficit treatment	75-85	45-55	65-75	75-85
V3G2	Vegetative growth stages with severe water deficit treatment, fleshy root growth stages with moderate water deficit treatment	75-85	45-55	55-65	75-85
CK	Control treatment	75-85	75-85	75-85	75-85

Treatments	Irrigation amount (m³·hm^-2)	Total biomass (kg·hm^-2)	Economic yield (kg·hm^-2)	Water saving rate (%)	Increasing yield rate (%)
V1G0	153.02	12577.33	8475.38 a	7.96	1.51
V2G0	150.87	11116.52	7638.14 b	9.26	-8.51
V3G0	133.16	10487.87	6986.12 d	19.91	-16.32
V1G1	151.81	12185.38	8308.44 a	8.69	-0.48
V1G2	147.04	10603.39	7147.23 bc	11.56	-14.39
V2G1	143.74	10577.01	7029.39 c	13.55	-15.80
V2G2	137.64	10212.44	6923.72 d	17.21	-17.07
V3G1	119.63	8988.38	5895.17 e	28.05	-29.39
V3G2	116.08	8798.07	5784.38 e	30.18	-30.72
CK	166.26	12591.06	8348.91 a	-	-