苜蓿斑蚜对三个苜蓿品种幼苗氧化酶的影响

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2009.01.007

›› 2009, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (1): 32-35.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2009.01.007

苜蓿斑蚜对三个苜蓿品种幼苗氧化酶的影响

刘长仲, 兰金娜

甘肃农业大学草业学院, 甘肃农业大学草业生态系统教育部重点实验室, 兰州, 730070

收稿日期:2008-08-22 修回日期:2008-11-13 出版日期:2009-02-15 发布日期:2009-02-15
作者简介:刘长仲(1962- ),男,重庆市人,博士,教授,主要从事昆虫生态及草地与农作物害虫治理研究,E-mail:liuchzh@gsau.edu.cn
基金资助:
甘肃省自然科学基金项目(0803RJZA031);国家科技支撑计划(2007BAD52B06);甘肃省教育厅科学研究项目(032-04);草业生态系统教育部重点实验室基金(CY-GG-2006-06);甘肃省创新人才工程科研资助项目

Variations of Oxidase in the Seedling of Three Alfalfa Varieties Infested by Therioaphis trifolii Monell(Homoptera:Aphididae)

LIU Chang-zhong, LAN Jin-na

Key Laboratory of Grassland Ecosystem of Education Ministry, Pratacultural College, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou, Gansu Province 730070, China

Received:2008-08-22 Revised:2008-11-13 Online:2009-02-15 Published:2009-02-15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用室内人工接虫的方法,研究HA-3(高抗)、甘农三号(中抗)和Hunter River(低抗)3种不同抗蚜苜蓿品种受苜蓿斑蚜(Therioaphis trifolii Monell)为害幼苗初期植株叶片SOD、POD、PPO等酶活性的变化。结果表明:苜蓿斑蚜为害后,3个苜蓿品种的SOD、POD、PPO的活性都显著上升,且随着虫口密度的增加而增强;苜蓿品种之间的SOD、POD、PPO活性变化存在显著差异;虽然HA-3苜蓿正常植株的SOD活性较高,但由于甘农三号苜蓿受蚜虫胁迫后SOD活性增长量大,使蚜虫胁迫植株的SOD活性与HA-3苜蓿没有显著差异;POD和PPO的活性在3个苜蓿品种正常植株之间没有显著差异,受蚜虫胁迫后,HA-3苜蓿的POD和PPO活性较高,甘农三号苜蓿次之,Hunter River苜蓿较低;3个苜蓿品种SOD、POD、PPO活性变化的差异,基本反映了其田间抗蚜性的差异水平。此研究对苜蓿抗蚜品种的选育及对蚜虫的持续控制具有重要意义。

关键词: 苜蓿斑蚜, 苜蓿幼苗, 保护酶

Abstract: It is necessary to study the relationship between aphid stress and oxidases in different alfalfa varieties for breeding of resistant alfalfa varieties and sustainable control of aphids.The changes in the activity of superoxide dismutase(SOD),peroxidase(POD),and polyphenol doxidase(PPO) were studied in seedling leaves of three alfalfa varieties,HA-3(High aphid resistance),Gannong No.3(aphid resistance),and Hunter River(low aphid resistance),infested by Therioaphis trifolii Monell through the artificial inoculation in lab.The results show that the activities of SOD,POD,and PPO in seedling leaves of three alfalfa varieties increased significantly along with the increasing of aphid densities.The changes in the activity of SOD,POD,and PPO of alfalfa seedling leaves after infestation by T.trifolii were significantly different among three alfalfa varieties.The SOD activities in seedling leaves of HA-3 and Gannong No.3 after infestation were higher than that of Hunter River,but the activities of POD and PPO were highest in HA-3,lowest in Hunter River,and middle in Gannong No.3.The differences of protective enzyme activities in three different aphids resistant alfalfa varieties were consistent with their resistant performances in the field.

Key words: Therioaphis trifolii Monell, Alfalfa seedling, Protective enzyme

中图分类号:

S551.7

刘长仲, 兰金娜. 苜蓿斑蚜对三个苜蓿品种幼苗氧化酶的影响[J]. , 2009, 17(1): 32-35.

LIU Chang-zhong, LAN Jin-na. Variations of Oxidase in the Seedling of Three Alfalfa Varieties Infested by Therioaphis trifolii Monell(Homoptera:Aphididae)[J]. , 2009, 17(1): 32-35.

参考文献

[1] Woodhead S,Bernays E.Changes in release rates of cyanide in relation to palatability of sorghum to insects[J]. Nature,1977,270:235-236.
[2] 朱麟,杨振德,赵博光,等.植食性昆虫诱导的植物抗性最新研究进展[J]. 林业科学,2005,41(1):165-173.
[3] Bryant J P,Reicherdt P B.Effects of mineral nutrition on delayed inducible resistance in Alaska paper birch[J]. Ecology,1993,74(7):2007-2084.
[4] Hunter M D,Schultz J C.Fertilization mitigates chemical induction and herbivore responses within damaged oak trees[J]. Ecology,1995,76(4):1226-1232.
[5] 张瑛,严福顺.虫害诱导的植物挥发性次生物质及其在植物防御中的作用[J]. 昆虫学报,1998,41(2):204-214.
[6] 薛皎亮,谢映平,刘计权,等.鞘蛾危害后诱导华北落叶松体内化学物质变化的研究[J]. 林业科学,2000,36(4):46-50.
[7] 王海波,陶芸,金沙.蚕豆叶片几丁质酶活性的蚜虫诱导-植物生理应激反应的趋同性[J]. 应用生态学报,1994,5(1):68-71.
[8] 张玲玲,韩诗畴,李志刚,等.艳婀珍蝶取食对薇甘菊叶片生理指标的影响[J]. 生态学报,2006,26(5):1330-1336.
[9] 杨广,徐清元,尤民生.小菜蛾取食后上海青的保护酶活力变化[J]. 华东昆虫学报,2004,13(1):48-54.
[10] Radcliffe E B,Weires R W,Stucker R E,et al.Influence of cultivars and pesticides on pea aphid,spotted alfalfa aphid,and associated arthropod taxa in a Minnesota alfalfa ecosystem[J]. Environmental Entomology,1976,5(6):1195-1207.
[11] Bommarco R,Ekbom B.Variation in pea aphid population development in three different habitats[J]. Ecological Entomology,1996,21:235-240.
[12] 高有华,刘长仲.不同温度下的豆无网长管蚜实验种群生命表研究[J]. 植物保护,2008,34(4):57-59.
[13] 徐林波,刘爱萍,王慧,等.龟纹瓢虫对苜蓿蚜的捕食效应[J]. 草地学报,2007,15(3):296-298.
[14] 张新瑞,刘长仲,严林,等.苜蓿田主要节肢动物种群数量研究[J]. 草地学报,2007,15(6):556-560.
[15] 刘长仲,王万雄,吴小刚,等.苜蓿人工草地节肢动物群落的时间格局[J]. 应用生态学报,2002,13(8):990-992.
[16] 白文辉,刘爱萍,宋银芳,等.我国北方主要栽培牧草害虫种类的调查[J]. 中国草地,1990,(5):58-60.
[17] 康天芳,刘长仲,马文生,等.几种药剂对苜蓿斑蚜的室内毒力及田间药效试验[J]. 植物保护,2005,31(4):90-92.
[18] 刘长仲,王刚,严林,等.蚜虱净对苜蓿田节肢动物群落结构及动态的影响[J]. 应用生态学报,2007,18(10):2379-2383.
[19] 刘长仲,严林,张新瑞,等.蚜虱净对苜蓿主要害虫及天敌种群数量的影响[J]. 生态学报,2008,28(10):5188-5193.
[20] 刘长仲,严林,魏列新,等.刈割对苜蓿主要害虫种群数量动态的影响[J]. 应用生态学报,2008,19 (3):691-694.
[21] 刘长仲,周淑荣.刈割对苜蓿人工草地昆虫群落结构及动态的影响[J]. 生态学报,2004,24(3):542-546.
[22] He C G,Zhang X G.Field evaluation of lucerne (Medicago sativa L.) for resistance to aphids in northern China[J]. Australian journal of Agricultural Research,2006,57(4):471-475.
[23] 兰金娜,刘长仲.苜蓿斑蚜刺吸胁迫对苜蓿幼苗的生理影响[J]. 植物保护,2007,33(6):74-77.
[24] 王建华,刘鸿先,徐同.超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)在植物逆境和衰老生理中的作用[J]. 植物生理学通讯,1989,(1):1-7.
[25] 哈尔滨工业大学.植物生理实验[M]. 哈尔滨工业大学出版社2004,46-49.
[26] 薛应龙.植物生理实验手册[M]. 上海:上海科学技术出版社,1985,138-139.
[27] 康乐.植物对昆虫的化学防御[J]. 植物学通报,1995,12(4):22-27.
[28] 秦秋菊,高希武.昆虫取食诱导的植物防御反应[J]. 昆虫学报,2005,48(1):125-134

苜蓿斑蚜对三个苜蓿品种幼苗氧化酶的影响

Variations of Oxidase in the Seedling of Three Alfalfa Varieties Infested by Therioaphis trifolii Monell(Homoptera:Aphididae)

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 3

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	钟华, 董洁, 郭晋梅, 董宽虎. 不同白羊草居群对干旱胁迫的生理响应及抗旱性评价[J]. 草地学报, 2018, 26(1): 195-202.
[2]	寇建村, 贾志宽, 易华, 雍小华. 断根对4年生紫花苜蓿第1茬叶片保护酶的影响[J]. , 2009, 17(5): 564-569.
[3]	张兴旭, 陈娜, 李春杰, 南志标. 禾谷缢管蚜与内生真菌互作对醉马草幼苗的生理影响[J]. , 2008, 16(3): 239-244,261.