桫椤光合特性和水势对干旱胁迫及复水的响应

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2023.01.007

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了弄清木本蕨类植物对干旱胁迫的适应能力,选用3a生桫椤苗,通过盆栽控水对其进行干旱胁迫和复水处理,研究了干旱历时3,6,9,12d和复水历时3,6,9d时桫椤叶片水势和光合作用的变化情况。结果表明,随干旱时间的延长,桫椤叶片水势整体呈升高趋势,净光合速率(P_n)呈下降趋势,胞间CO₂浓度(C_i)呈先降低后升高的趋势,气孔导度(G_s)和蒸腾速率(T_r)呈降低—升高—降低的趋势。干旱初期(6d前),P_n与G_s,C_i变化趋势基本一致,P_n的下降主要由气孔限制引起。而干旱后期(6d后),P_n与G_s,C_i变化趋势不一致,P_n的下降主要由非气孔限制引发。复水后,桫椤叶片P_n和T_r基本恢复到了充分供水时的水平,而水势、G_s和C_i恢复到了充分供水时以上的水平。同时,桫椤叶片水分利用效率(WUE)随干旱时间的延长呈先升高后降低的趋势,在干旱6d后即呈下降趋势,且复水后,桫椤叶片WUE基本恢复到了充分供水时的水平。综合来看,桫椤具有相对较差的干旱耐受能力和相对较强的复水恢复能力。并且,通过干旱胁迫和复水过程光合生理特征的综合分析,初步认为桫椤属于干旱避免型植物。

关键词: 桫椤, 光合作用, 干旱胁迫, 复水, 水分利用效率, 水势

Abstract:

In order to clarify the adaptability of woody ferns to drought stress,3-year-old Alsophila spinulosa seedlings were selected for drought stress and rehydration treatment through potted water control.The changes of water potential and photosynthesis in the leaves of Alsophila spinulosa were studied after 3,6,9,12 days of drought and after 3,6,and 9 days of rehydration.The results showed that with the prolongation of drought time,the water potential of Alsophila spinulosa leaves showed an overall upward trend,the net photosynthetic rate (P_n) showed a downward trend,the inter-CO₂ concentration (C_i) first decreased and then increased,and the stomatal conductance (G_s) and transpiration rate (T_r) showed a trend of decreasing-increasing-decreasing.In the early stage of drought (6 days ago),the change trend of P_n,G_s and C_i was basically the same,and the decrease of P_n was mainly caused by stomatal limitation.In the later period of drought (after 6 days),the change trend of P_n was inconsistent with that of G_s and C_i,and the decrease of P_n was mainly caused by non-stomatal limitation.After rehydration,P_n and T_r of Alsophila spinulosa leaves recovered to the level of adequate water supply,while the water potential,G_s and C_i recovered to the level above that of adequate water supply.At the same time,the water use efficiency (WUE) of Alsophila spinulosa leaves increased first and then decreased with the prolongation of drought time,and showed a downward trend after 6 days of drought.And after rehydration,the WUE basically recovered to the level of adequate water supply.Taken together,Alsophila spinulosa has relatively poor drought tolerance and relatively strong rehydration recovery ability.Through the analysis of the photosynthetic physiological characteristics of drought stress and rehydration process,it is preliminarily considered that Alsophila spinulosa is a drought-avoiding plant.

Key words: Alsophila spinulosa, photosynthesis, drought stress, rehydration, water use efficiency, water potential

中图分类号:

Q945

吕朝燕, 高智席, 徐兴线, 吴焕, 陈兴艳. 桫椤光合特性和水势对干旱胁迫及复水的响应[J]. 林业资源管理, 2023, 0(1): 51-61.

LV Chaoyan, GAO Zhixi, XU Xingxian, WU Huan, CHEN Xingyan. Responses of Photosynthetic Characteristics and Water Potential of Alsophila spinulosa to Drought Stress and Rehydration[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2023, 0(1): 51-61.

图/表 15

图1

表1

图2

表2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

图10

图11

图12

图13

参考文献 43

[1]	Verslues P E, Agarwal M, Katiyar-Agarwal S, et al. Methods and concepts in quantifying resistance to drought,salt and freezing,abiotic stresses that affect plant water status[J]. Plant Journal, 2006, 45(4):523-539. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2005.02593.x pmid: 16441347
[2]	Wassmann R, Jagadish S V K, Heuer S, et al. Climate change affecting rice production:The physiological and agronomic basis for possible adaptation strategies[J]. Advances in Agronomy, 2009, 101(8):59-122.
[3]	黄海霞, 连转红, 王亮, 等. 裸果木渗透调节物质和抗氧化酶活性对干旱的响应[J]. 干旱区研究, 2020, 37(1):227-235.
[4]	曲涛, 南志标. 作物和牧草对干旱胁迫的响应及机理研究进展[J]. 草业学报, 2008, 17(2):126-135.
[5]	Medrano H. Regulation of photosynthesis of C₃ plants in response to progressive drought:Stomatal conductance as a reference parameter[J]. Annals of Botany, 2002, 89(7):895-905. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcf079
[6]	Klein T. The variability of stomatal sensitivity to leaf water potential across tree species indicates a continuum between isohydric and anisohydric behaviours[J]. Functional Ecology, 2015, 28(6):1313-1320. doi: 10.1111/1365-2435.12289
[7]	黄子琛, 沈渭寿. 干旱区植物的水分关系与耐旱性[M]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 2000.
[8]	云建英, 杨甲定, 赵哈林. 干旱和高温对植物光合作用的影响机制研究进展[J]. 西北植物学报, 2006, 26(3):641-648.
[9]	王磊, 张彤, 丁圣彦. 干旱和复水对不同倍性小麦光合生理生态的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2008, 28(4):1593-1600.
[10]	厉广辉, 万勇善, 刘风珍, 等. 苗期干旱及复水条件下不同花生品种的光合特性[J]. 植物生态学报, 2014, 38(7):729-739. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00068
[11]	Xu Zhenzhu, Zhou Guangsheng, Shimizu H. Plant responses to drought and rewatering[J]. Plant Signaling & Behavior, 2010, 5(6):649-654.
[12]	代正福, 周正邦, 欧珍贵, 等. 贵州观赏类野生桫椤科植物资源研究初报[J]. 种子, 1999(4):43-44.
[13]	许斌, 朱文泉, 李培先. 不同气候条件下桫椤在中国的潜在适生区分布[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(17):6105-6117.
[14]	张华, 赵浩翔, 徐存刚. 气候变化背景下孑遗植物桫椤在中国的潜在地理分布[J]. 生态学杂志, 2021, 40(4):968-979.
[15]	施利祥. 树型蕨类桫椤生物学特征初探[J]. 宁德师范学院学报:自然科学版, 2007, 19(4):364-366.
[16]	周志琼, 苏智先, 廖永梅, 等. 桫椤的生物学研究进展[J]. 贵州师范大学学报:自然科学版, 2004, 22(3):100-103.
[17]	赵瑞白, 杨小波, 李东海, 等. 海南岛桫椤科植物地理分布和分布特征研究[J]. 林业资源管理, 2018(2):65-73.
[18]	刘后鑫. 桫椤科植物叶形态结构特征及其分类学意义[D]. 临汾: 山西师范大学, 2016.
[19]	吕朝燕, 高智席, 徐兴线, 等. 干旱胁迫及复水对桫椤生理特性的影响[J]. 林业资源管理, 2022(5):160-168.
[20]	Kramer P J. Water relation of plants[M]. New York: Academic Press,1985.
[21]	柏新富, 卜庆梅, 谭永芹, 等. 植物4种水势测定方法的比较及可靠性分析[J]. 林业科学, 2012, 48(12):128-133.
[22]	吕朝燕, 高智席, 严羽, 等. 干旱—复水对两种石斛属植物叶水势的影响[J]. 广西植物, 2021, 41(2):177-182.
[23]	曾凡江, 张希明, 李小明. 柽柳的水分生理特性研究进展[J]. 应用生态学报, 2002, 13(5):611-614.
[24]	张静鸽, 田福平, 苗海涛, 等. 水分胁迫及复水过程4种牧草形态及其生理特征表达[J]. 干旱区研究, 2020, 37(1):193-201.
[25]	付晓玥, 闫建成, 梁存柱, 等. 干旱与半干旱区一年生植物水势对模拟降水变化的响应[J]. 内蒙古大学学报:自然科学版, 2012, 43(2):52-59.
[26]	曾凡江, 李向义, 张希明, 等. 新疆策勒绿洲外围四种多年生植物的水分生理特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 2009, 20(11):2632-2638.
[27]	令铎, 张仁和, 韩苗苗, 等. 干旱复水激发玉米叶片补偿效应的生理机制[J]. 西北农业学报, 2009, 18(2):88-92.
[28]	王东清, 李国旗, 王磊. 干旱胁迫下红麻和大麻状罗布麻水分生理及光合作用特征研究[J]. 西北植物学报, 2012, 32(6):1198-1205.
[29]	滕志远, 张栩涵, 张会慧, 等. 干旱及复水对桑树叶片光合能力的影响[J]. 草业科学, 2018, 35(4):848-856.
[30]	宋莉英, 孙兰兰, 舒展, 等. 干旱和复水对入侵植物三裂叶蟛蜞菊叶片叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2009, 29(7):3714-3719.
[31]	Burman U, Garg B K, Kathju S. Water relations,photosynthesis and nitrogen metabolism of Indian mustard grown under salt and water stress[J]. Journal of Plant Biology, 2003, 30(1):55-60.
[32]	Farquhar G D, Sharkey T D. Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis[J]. Annual Review of Plant Physiology, 1982, 33(1):317-345. doi: 10.1146/arplant.1982.33.issue-1
[33]	杨文权, 顾沐宇, 寇建村, 等. 干旱及复水对小冠花光合及叶绿素荧光参数的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2013, 21(6):1130-1135. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2013.06.015
[34]	金江群, 郭泉水, 朱莉, 等. 干旱和复水对崖柏光合特性及水分利用效率的影响[J]. 植物科学学报, 2012, 30(6):599-610.
[35]	柯世省, 金则新. 干旱胁迫和复水对夏蜡梅幼苗光合生理特性的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2007, 13(6):1166-1172.
[36]	李敏敏, 袁军伟, 韩斌, 等. 干旱和复水对两种葡萄砧木叶片光合和叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2019, 37(1):221-226.
[37]	刘婷婷, 陈道钳, 王仕稳, 等. 不同品种高粱幼苗在干旱复水过程中的生理生态响应[J]. 草业学报, 2018, 27(6):100-110. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2017410
[38]	Miyashita K, Tanakamaru S, Maitani T, et al. Recovery responses of photosynthesis,transpiration and stomatal conductance in kidney bean following drought stress[J]. Environmental & Experimental Botany, 2005, 53(2):205-214.
[39]	Montagu K D, Woo K C. Recovery of tree photosynthetic capacity from seasonal drought in the wet-dry tropics:The role of phyllode and canopy processes in Acacia auriculiformis[J]. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 1999, 26(2):135-145.
[40]	刘吉利, 赵长星, 吴娜, 等. 苗期干旱及复水对花生光合特性及水分利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44(3):469-476.
[41]	李磊, 贾志清, 朱雅娟, 等. 我国干旱区植物抗旱机理研究进展[J]. 中国沙漠, 2010, 30(5):1053-1059.
[42]	Schwanz P, Picon C, Vivin P, et al. Responses of antioxidative systems to drought stress in Pendunculate Oak and Maritime Pine as modulated by elevated CO₂[J]. Plant Physiology, 1996, 110(2):393-402. pmid: 12226191
[43]	Picon C, Guehl J M, Ferhi A. Leaf gas exchange and carbon isotope composition responses to drought in a drought-avoiding(Pinus pinaster)and a drought-tolerant(Quercus petraea)species under present and elevated atmospheric CO₂ concentrations[J]. Plant Cell & Enviroment, 2010, 19(2):182-190.

处理	水势/ MPa	净光合速率/ [μmol CO₂/(m²·s)]	气孔导度/ [mol H₂O/(m²·s)]	胞间CO₂浓度/ (μmol CO₂/mol)	蒸腾速率/ [mmol H₂O/(m²·s)]	水分利用效率/ (μmol CO₂/mmol H₂O)
充分供水	-0.9720	0.7423	0.0192	317.6725	0.5528	1.7349
干旱3d	-0.9471	0.6206	0.0160	277.9778	0.4389	1.7809
干旱6d	-0.9674	0.5790	0.0245	261.7283	0.5412	1.3600
干旱9d	-0.9043	0.5284	0.0175	282.6483	0.4631	1.3639
干旱12d	-0.8895	0.4276	0.0130	306.2833	0.4528	1.3395

处理	水势/ MPa	净光合速率/ [μmol CO₂/(m²·s)]	气孔导度/ [mol H₂O/(m²·s)]	胞间CO₂浓度/ (μmol CO₂/mol)	蒸腾速率/ [mmol H₂O/(m²·s)]	水分利用效率/ (μmol CO₂/mmol H₂O)
充分供水	-0.9720	0.7423	0.0192	317.6725	0.5528	1.7349
复水3d	-0.9067	0.5887	0.0280	318.2675	0.5560	1.3773
复水6d	-0.9290	0.6562	0.0396	326.3429	0.5946	1.7773
复水9d	-0.9073	0.7062	0.0284	348.1192	0.6477	1.7619