Effect of Exogenous Plant Hormones on Biomass Allocation of Fraxinus malacophylla Seedlings

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2021.03.012

Abstract

Abstract:

Taking Fraxinus malacophylla container seedlings as materials,L₉ (3 ⁴) orthogonal experiment method was used to determine the biomass of Fraxinus malacophylla seedlings under three exogenous plant hormones,zeatin (ZT),3-indoleacetic acid (IAA),and gibberellin (GA₃),the relationship between the biomass and its distribution of different seedlings and different hormones was compared and analyzed.The allometric growth relationship between different organs of Fraxinus malacophylla seedlings under different exogenous plant hormone treatments was analyzed using standard spindle regression.The results showed that among different exogenous plant hormones,ZT and IAA dominated the biomass of seedlings,and GA₃ had no significant effect;there was a significant difference in biomass and biomass allocation of different organs between different treatments.Treatment No.4 (ZT 50mg/L,IAA 50mg/L,GA₃ 150 mg/L) was significantly larger than other treatments,but the biomass allocation ratio of each organ was not significant.Treatment No.9 (ZT 75 mg/L,IAA 150 mg/L,GA3150 mg/L) had the smallest total biomass,but it had a higher stem biomass distribution ratio.The allogeneic growth relationship between different organs under different exogenous plant hormone treatments was different,but the overall growth was isokinetic,indicating that the effect of exogenous plant hormones on allometric growth of Fraxinus malacophylla seedlings was not significant.Under the action of different exogenous plant hormones,the biomass of Fraxinus malacophylla seedlings has changed significantly,and the distribution of resources in the environment by the seedlings has not changed significantly.

Key words: Fraxinus malacophylla, exogenous plant hormones, biomass allocation, allometry

CLC Number:

S792.99

DUAN Huachao, ZHENG Xinhua, LI Yanyan, YE Lan, JING Huizhu, DONG Qiong. Effect of Exogenous Plant Hormones on Biomass Allocation of Fraxinus malacophylla Seedlings[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2021, (3): 76-83.

Figures/Tables 9

Tab.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Fig.1

Tab.5

Tab.6

The standardized major axis regression(SMA) analysis between each organic of F.malacophylla seedings

干重指标	处理	n	R²	P	SAM	95%CI	P_1.0
叶(y)—根(x)	1	18	0.852	0.009	0.5551	0.3330~0.9253	0.032
	2	18	0.394	0.182	0.6139	0.2405~1.5669	0.262
	3	18	0.534	0.099	1.3092	0.5630~3.0445	0.469
	4	18	0.339	0.226	0.7575	0.2873~1.9978	0.527
	5	18	0.074	0.602	1.3879	0.4620~4.1701	0.526
	6	18	0.433	0.155	1.4490	0.5815~3.6108	0.371
	7	18	0.345	0.220	1.2885	0.8711~2.0122	0.084
	8	18	0.324	0.238	0.8977	0.3377~2.3866	0.806
	9	18	0.053	0.660	0.6430	0.2121~1.9492	0.402
	CK	18	0.412	0.169	1.2150	0.4812~3.0674	0.636
叶(y)-茎(x)	1	18	0.664	0.048	1.3532	0.6480~2.8259	0.349
	2	18	0.593	0.073	0.3849	0.1733~0.8548	0.026
	3	18	0.814	0.014	1.5499	0.8781~2.7356	0.104
	4	18	0.307	0.254	1.3603	0.5069~3.6503	0.494
	5	18	0.132	0.478	1.2377	0.4228~3.6236	0.669
	6	18	0.579	0.079	1.2392	0.5516~2.7842	0.542
	7	18	0.206	0.366	1.3530	0.4784~3.8266	0.529
	8	18	0.284	0.277	0.5341	0.1965~2.7842	0.189
	9	18	0.130	0.483	0.7013	0.2393~2.0554	0.481
	CK	18	0.757	0.024	1.6971	0.8946~3.2194	0.088
茎(y)-根(x)	1	18	0.383	0.190	0.4102	0.1596~1.0540	0.061
	2	18	0.584	0.077	1.5950	0.7129~3.5685	0.208
	3	18	0.219	0.349	0.8447	0.3007~2.3731	0.721
	4	18	0.048	0.677	0.5569	0.1833~1.6920	0.273
	5	18	0.001	0.958	1.1214	0.3620~3.4742	0.830
	6	18	0.430	0.157	1.1693	0.4684~2.9190	0.699
	7	18	0.871	0.007	1.6914	1.0464~2.7339	0.038
	8	18	0.736	0.029	1.6809	0.8654~3.2648	0.102
	9	18	0.624	0.062	0.9169	0.4236~1.9846	0.791
	CK	18	0.359	0.208	0.7159	0.2747~1.8656	0.443
地上(y)-地下(x)	1	18	0.746	0.027	0.4798	0.2498~0.9218	0.034
	2	18	0.564	0.085	0.9423	0.4146~2.1414	0.866
	3	18	0.426	0.160	1.0651	0.4255~2.6660	0.876
	4	18	0.094	0.556	0.5896	0.1979~1.7566	0.310
	5	18	0.025	0.765	0.9994	0.3258~1.7566	0.999
	6	18	0.490	0.121	1.2550	0.5232~3.0106	0.556
	7	18	0.073	0.604	1.2615	0.4197~3.7918	0.652
	8	18	0.713	0.034	1.0906	0.5482~2.1697	0.762
	9	18	0.481	0.126	0.6872	0.2847~1.6592	0.347
	CK	18	0.421	0.163	1.0492	0.4179~2.6342	0.906

Tab.6

Tab.7

Tab.8

References 35

[1]	Poorter H, NiklasK J, ReichP B, et al. Biomass allocation to leaves,stems and roots:meta-analyses of interspecific variation and environment control[J]. New Phytologist, 2012, 193(1):30-50. doi: 10.1111/nph.2011.193.issue-1
[2]	冯丽, 张景光, 张志山, 等. 腾格里沙漠人工固沙植被中油蒿的生长及生物量分配动态[J]. 植物生态学报, 2009, 33(6):1132-1139. doi: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2009.06.013
[3]	罗永开, 方精云, 胡会峰. 山西芦芽山14种常见灌木生物量模型及生物量分配[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(1):115-125. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2016.0131
[4]	李鑫, 李昆, 段安安, 等. 不同地理种源云南松幼苗生物量分配及其异速生长[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2019, 41(4):41-50.
[5]	张磊, 吕光辉, 蒋腊梅, 等. 四种荒漠植物生物量分配对土壤因子的响应及异速生长分析[J]. 广西植物, 2019, 39(9):1201-1211.
[6]	卢艺苗, 王满堂, 陈晓萍, 等. 江西常绿阔叶林木本植物不同冠层高度当年生小枝茎构型对叶生物量的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(11):3653-3661.
[7]	Sun J, Wang M, Lyu M, et al. Stem diameter (and not length) limits twig leaf biomass[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2019, 10:185. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00185
[8]	中国科学院中国植物志编辑委员会. 中国植物志(第六十一卷)[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1992: 12.
[9]	李乡旺. 野生树种白枪杆的驯化及在石漠化治理中的应用[DB/OL]. [2021-03-23]. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?dbcode=SNAD&dbname=SNAD&filename=SNAD000000013801&v/2005-01-31.
[10]	高洁, 李兴彪, 李乡旺, 等. 滇东南半干热石漠化治理8个主要树种抗旱性研究[J]. 西南林业大学学报, 2015, 35(2):1-10.
[11]	陈强. 云南岩溶石漠化生态治理模式及技术[M]. 昆明: 云南科技出版社, 2010: 135.
[12]	谭兴起, 郭良君, 郑巍, 等. 白枪杆的化学成分研究(Ⅰ)[J]. 中国药房, 2013, 24(43):4081-4083.
[13]	张锋, 潘康标, 田子华. 植物生长调节剂研究进展及应用对策[J]. 现代农业科技, 2012(1):193-195.
[14]	Ali F, Bano A, Fazal A. Recent methods of drought stress tolerance in plants[J]. Plant Growth Regulation, 2017, 82(3):363-375. doi: 10.1007/s10725-017-0267-2
[15]	Tamara P V, Carolineg O, Nathalia S P, et al. Vegetal regulators increase the quality of atemoya fruits and recover the photosynthetic metabolism of stressed plants[J]. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 2019, 41(9):1-8. doi: 10.1007/s11738-018-2785-6
[16]	吕享, 叶睿华, 田海露, 等. 生长素介导细胞分裂素(玉米素)调控杜鹃兰侧芽萌发[J]. 农业生物技术学报, 2018, 26(11):1872-1879.
[17]	Wang H, Jones B, Li Z, et al. The Tomato Aux/IAA Transcription Factor IAA9 Is Involved in Fruit Development and Leaf Morphogenesis[J]. The Plant Cell, 2005, 17:2676-2692. doi: 10.1105/tpc.105.033415
[18]	张国华, 张艳洁, 丛日晨, 等. 赤霉素作用机制研究进展[J]. 西北植物学报, 2009, 29(2):412-419.
[19]	张旭, 聂刚, 黄琳凯, 等. 植物生长调节剂对鸭茅种子产量的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(6):93-100.
[20]	何祯, 徐云鹏, 张晓敏, 等. 不同浓度赤霉素对白枪杆种子萌发的影响[J]. 山东林业科技, 2012, 42(2):20-23.
[21]	Warton D I, Weber N C. Common slope tests for bivariate errors-in-variables models[J]. Biometrical Journal, 2015, 44(2):161-174. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1521-4036
[22]	Warton D I, Wright I J, Falstre D S, et al. Bivariate line-fitting methods for allometry[J]. Biological Reviews, 2006, 81:259-291. pmid: 16573844
[23]	李曼清. 三种植物生长物质(GGR、IAA、PP_(333))对黄花风铃木幼苗生长及生理特性影响[D]. 南宁:广西大学, 2015.
[24]	杨东清, 董文华, 骆永丽, 等. 外源6-BA对两种氮素水平下小麦幼苗叶片光合性能及内源激素含量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(20):3871-3884.
[25]	王艺, 贾忠奎, 马履一, 等. 4种植物生长调节剂对红花玉兰嫩枝扦插生根的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(7):35-45.
[26]	韦秋梅. LED不同光质及光周期对山白兰苗木生长及光合特性的影响[D]. 南宁:广西大学, 2018.
[27]	石建斌. 马铃薯赤霉素合成代谢途径关键酶基因GA2ox1、GA20ox1的克隆与功能分析[D]. 西宁:青海大学, 2016.
[28]	黄杰, 施福军, 李曼清, 等. 3种植物生长调节剂对黄花风铃木幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 安徽农业大学学报, 2019, 46(3):440-447.
[29]	姚婧, 李颖, 魏丽萍, 等. 东灵山不同林型五角枫叶性状异速生长关系随发育阶段的变化[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(13):3907-3915.
[30]	White P S. Corner's rules in eastern deciduous trees:Allometry and its implications for the adaptive architecture of trees[J]. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club, 1983, 110:203-212. doi: 10.2307/2996342
[31]	Reich P B, Tjoelker M G, Machado J L, et al. Universal scaling of respiratory metabolism,size and nitrogen in plants[J]. Nature, 2006, 439(7075):457-461. doi: 10.1038/nature04282
[32]	魏道智, 宁书菊. 玉米素脱落酸处理对小麦叶片光合性能的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2002(S1):23-28.
[33]	胡勇军. 外源复合激素调控下人工草地羊草生长及生理学特性研究[D]. 长春:东北师范大学, 2014.
[34]	Corner E J H. The durian theory or the origin of the modern tree[J]. Annals of Botany, 1949, 13:367-414. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a083225
[35]	Addicott F T. Plant hormones in the control of abscission[J]. Biological Reviews, 2010, 45(4):485-524. doi: 10.1111/brv.1970.45.issue-4

生物量	激素	平方和	自由度	均方	F统计量	显著性
总生物量	ZT	29.113	2	14.556	22.403	0.000
	IAA	10.799	2	5.399	8.310	0.001
	GA₃	4.980	2	2.490	3.832	0.029
	e	138.591	155	0.896
	Total	183.483	161
地上生物量	ZT	16.186	2	8.093	18.622	0.000
	IAA	6.160	2	3.080	7.087	0.002
	GA₃	3.121	2	1.560	3.590	0.035
	e	89.119	155	0.575
	Total	114.586	161
根生物量	ZT	2.107	2	1.053	18.115	0.000
	IAA	0.651	2	0.325	5.596	0.007
	GA₃	0.217	2	0.108	1.864	0.166
	e	10.803	155	0.070
	Total	13.778	161
茎生物量	ZT	3.175	2	1.587	13.576	0.000
	IAA	0.407	2	0.203	1.739	0.187
	GA₃	0.228	2	0.114	0.973	0.385
	e	18.389	155	0.119
	Total	22.199	161
叶生物量	ZT	5.892	2	2.946	14.987	0.000
	IAA	3.410	2	1.705	8.674	0.001
	GA₃	1.860	2	0.930	4.732	0.013
	e	43.529	155	0.281
	Total	54.691	161

处理	总	地上	根	茎	叶
1	4.85±0.93ab	3.68±0.58ab	1.17±0.39ab	1.38±0.18b	2.30±0.42a
2	4.48±0.73ab	3.52±0.60ab	0.96±0.16ab	1.33±0.40bc	2.19±0.23a
3	3.55±1.16bc	2.64±0.93bc	0.91±0.32b	1.21±0.35bc	1.43±0.62b
4	5.38±0.75a	4.19±0.63a	1.19±0.25a	1.84±0.25a	2.35±0.45a
5	3.71±0.79b	2.95±0.75bc	0.76±0.21bc	1.50±0.40ab	1.45±0.46b
6	3.85±0.85b	3.16±0.76b	0.69±0.12bc	1.38±0.33b	1.78±0.49ab
7	2.88±0.53c	2.36±0.55bc	0.52±0.09c	0.96±0.27c	1.40±0.60b
8	2.86±0.57c	2.25±0.47c	0.61±0.12c	1.01±0.33bc	1.24±0.20b
9	2.47±0.84c	1.98±0.64c	0.49±0.24c	0.96±0.50c	1.02±0.33b
CK	3.42±1.22bc	2.72±1.04bc	0.70±0.23bc	0.75±0.19c	1.97±0.86ab

测定项目	平方和	自由度	均方	F统计量	显著性
根分配比	0.152	9	0.013	3.189	0.006
茎分配比	0.140	9	0.016	4.729	0.000
叶分配比	0.145	9	0.016	3.400	0.003
地上分配比	0.219	9	0.009	2.578	0.028

干重指标			共同斜率	95%CI	t	p
叶(y)	—	根(x)	0.9560	0.6796~1.3375	11.694	0.200
叶(y)	—	茎(x)	1.2435	0.9188~1.6086	12.661	0.158
茎(y)	—	根(x)	1.1575	0.8253~1.5630	13.257	0.129
地上(y)	—	地下(x)	0.9149	0.6827~1.2063	6.616	0.620

指标			处理
指标			1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	CK
叶(y)	—	根(x)	0.399ab	0.315ab	0.058b	0.427a	0.014b	0.072b	-0.166bc	-0.121bc	-0.342c	0.095b
叶(y)	—	茎(x)	0.527ab	0.474b	0.204bc	0.689a	0.342bc	0.395bc	0.073c	0.074c	-0.078c	0.094c
茎(y)	—	根(x)	0.190ab	0.081b	-0.006bc	0.337a	0.007b	-0.068bc	-0.372c	-0.267c	-0.460c	-0.338c
地上(y)	—	地下(x)	0.603a	0.519ab	0.339ab	0.678a	0.336b	0.332b	0.096c	0.144bc	-0.041c	0.250bc