Comparison and Evaluation of Drought Resistance of 15 Forage-Type Oat Germplasm Materials at Seedling Stage

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.12.018

Acta Agrestia Sinica ›› 2023, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (12): 3734-3743.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.12.018

Previous Articles Next Articles

Comparison and Evaluation of Drought Resistance of 15 Forage-Type Oat Germplasm Materials at Seedling Stage

ZHAO Xiao-na¹, GAO Zhi-hao¹, WANG Bin¹, ZHANG Yi-yin¹, HU Hai-ying^1,2, LAN Jian^1,2

1. College of Forestry and Prataculture, Ningxia University, Yinchuan, Ningxia 750021, China;
2. Ningxia Grass and Animal Husbandry Engineering Technology Research Center, Yinchuan, Ningxia 750021, China

Received:2023-06-06 Revised:2023-07-26 Online:2023-12-15 Published:2024-01-03

15份饲用型燕麦种质材料苗期抗旱性比较与评价

赵小娜¹, 高志昊¹, 王斌¹, 张译尹¹, 胡海英^1,2, 兰剑^1,2

1. 宁夏大学林业与草业学院, 宁夏银川 750021;
2. 宁夏草牧业工程研究中心, 宁夏银川 750021

通讯作者: 胡海英,E-mail:haiying@nxu.edu.cn
作者简介:赵小娜(1999-)，女，汉族，甘肃庆阳人，硕士研究生，主要从事牧草育种与栽培研究，E-mail:854189710@qq.com
基金资助:
宁夏重点研发计划项目(2019NYYZ0402)；宁夏高等学校一流学科建设(草学学科)资助项目(NXYLXK2017A01)资助

Abstract

Abstract: In order to select drought-tolerant oat (Avena sativa) germplasm suitable for planting in arid and semi-arid region of Ningxia,the response characteristics of 15 oat germplasm materials to drought stress,such as growth performance,photosynthetic parameters,osmoregulatory substances content and carbon stable isotope composition (δ¹³C value),were studied by pot water control method;then the drought resistance of 15 oat germplasm materials was compared and evaluated comprehensively. The results showed that compared with the control,the growth indexes,photosynthetic parameters and relative water content of leaves of 15 oat materials were significantly decreased under drought stress,while the starch content,soluble sugar content,proline content,malondialdehyde content and δ¹³C value significantly increased. By the principal component analysis,it was showed that the drought resistance of 15 oat germplasm materials were ranked as follows:YUN>XS>FH>7BY>2TY>YMYC>70TY>ZZT>WH>LM>TMQH>YUE>MYT>WFD>KNM. Therefore,YUN,XS and FH are able to be promoted in arid and semi-arid areas.

Key words: Oats, Drought stress, Growth index, Photosynthetic parameter, Osmotic regulation

摘要： 为筛选出适宜宁夏干旱半干旱地区种植的抗旱性燕麦(Avena sativa)种质，试验采用盆栽控水法模拟干旱胁迫处理，研究15份燕麦种质材料的生长性能、光合参数、渗透调节物质含量及碳稳定同位素组成(δ¹³C值)等对干旱胁迫的响应特征，综合分析比较和评价15份燕麦种质材料的抗旱性。结果表明，与对照相比，干旱胁迫下15份燕麦材料的生长指标、光合参数和叶片相对含水量均显著下降，而淀粉含量、可溶性糖含量、脯氨酸含量、丙二醛含量和δ¹³C值均显著上升。主成分分析表明，15份燕麦种质材料的抗旱性排序为：'喜韵'>'三星'>'荟峰'>'白燕7号'>'甜燕2号'>'盐池燕麦'>'甜燕70'>'挑战者'>'禾王'>'梦龙'>'甜燕麦青海'>'喜越'>'甜燕麦'>'大富翁'>'莫尼卡'。因此，'喜韵''三星'和'荟峰'可在干旱半干旱地区推广种植。

关键词: 燕麦, 干旱胁迫, 生长指标, 光合参数, 渗透调节

CLC Number:

S512.6

ZHAO Xiao-na, GAO Zhi-hao, WANG Bin, ZHANG Yi-yin, HU Hai-ying, LAN Jian. Comparison and Evaluation of Drought Resistance of 15 Forage-Type Oat Germplasm Materials at Seedling Stage[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(12): 3734-3743.

赵小娜, 高志昊, 王斌, 张译尹, 胡海英, 兰剑. 15份饲用型燕麦种质材料苗期抗旱性比较与评价[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(12): 3734-3743.

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.12.018

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/Y2023/V31/I12/3734

References

[1] 王腾飞,常怡然,邓雪,等. 饲用燕麦品种在宁夏雨养区的适应性评价[J]. 草地学报,2022,30(7):1755-1762
[2] 李世忠,徐坤,谢应忠. 浅谈宁夏半干旱地区牧草产业的可持续发展[J]. 中国草地,2005,27(3):75-77
[3] 高志昊. 饲用型燕麦种质材料抗旱性评价与耐旱型品种筛选[D]. 银川:宁夏大学,2022:1-9
[4] 汪灿,周棱波,张国兵,等. 酒用糯高粱资源成株期抗旱性鉴定及抗旱指标筛选[J]. 中国农业科学,2017,50(8):1388-1402
[5] 王晓雪,李越,张斌,等. 干旱胁迫及复水对燕麦根系生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 草地学报,2020,28(6):1588-1596
[6] 孙百生,钱金平,赵欢蕊. 西北典型荒漠植物红砂生物量及根系形态特征对降水格局的响应[J]. 生态环境学报,2018,27(11):1993-1999
[7] 辛国荣,董美玲,宋淑明. 牧草抗旱性研究水分胁迫下几种燕麦品种的一些生理生化变化及其与植物抗旱性关系的研究[J]. 草业科学,1996,13(5):52-57
[8] AUERSWALD K,LANDINGER C,WITTMER M,et al.¹³Carbon allocated to the leaf growth zone of Poa pratensis reflects soil water and vapor pressure deficit[J]. Grassland Science in Europe,2010,15(1):857-859
[9] 刘建新,王鑫,王凤琴. 水分胁迫对苜蓿幼苗渗透调节物质积累和保护酶活性的影响[J]. 草业科学,2005,22(3):18-21
[10] 刘金龙,王莹,许爱云,等. 干旱胁迫下5种禾本科牧草幼苗期的生理特性[J]. 草业科学,2018,35(5):1106-1115
[11] 姚春娟,郭圣茂,马英超,等. 干旱胁迫对4种决明属植物光合作用和叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 草业科学,2017,34(9):1880-1888
[12] 宫晓旭. 燕麦引种适应性评价及播期对生长发育和产量性状的影响[D]. 通辽:内蒙古民族大学,2020:4-5
[13] 刘万弟,李小伟. 宁夏针茅属植物叶片碳稳定同位素特征及其影响因素[J]. 草地学报,2022,30(8):2058-2065
[14] 李合生,赵世杰. 植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M]. 北京:高等教育出版社,2000:79-80
[15] 陈建勋,王晓峰. 植物生理学实验指导[M]. 广州:华南理工大学出版社,2006:59-60
[16] 苏立娜,麻冬梅,李嘉文,等. 外源褪黑素对盐胁迫下两种紫花苜蓿生理及光合特性的影响[J]. 草地学报,2023,31(3):726-732
[17] 王斌,杨雨琦,李满有,等. 不同播种量下行距配置对紫花苜蓿产量及品质的影响[J]. 草业学报,2022,31(2):147-158
[18] 李文娆,张岁岐,丁圣彦,等. 干旱胁迫下紫花苜蓿根系形态变化及与水分利用的关系[J]. 生态学报,2010,30(19):5140-5150
[19] 杨丹,张舒芸,田新会,等. 不同黑麦品种(品系)对持续干旱胁迫的形态适应性研究[J]. 草地学报,2020,28(1):122-129
[20] 王绮玉,刘欢,仁增旺堆,等. 藏沙蒿种质材料苗期抗旱性综合评价[J]. 草地学报,2023,31(1):148-156
[21] 阿日文. 土壤水分对牡丹生长及生理特性影响的研究[D]. 长春:吉林农业大学,2015:11-14
[22] RAZAVI F,POLLET B,STEPPE K,et al. Chlorophyll fluorescence as a tool for evaluation of drought stress in strawberry photosynthetica[J]. Photosynthetica,2008,46(4):631-633
[23] LIU B H,LIANG J,TANG G M,et al. Drought stress affects on growth,water use efficiency,gas exchange and chlorophyll fluorescence of Juglans rootstocks[J]. Scientia Horticulturae,2019,250(5):230-235
[24] 季杨,张新全,彭燕,等. 干旱胁迫对鸭茅幼苗根系生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 应用生态学报,2013,24(10):2763-2769
[25] NIELSEN D C,VIGIL M F,BENJAMIN J G. The variable response of dryland corn yield to soil water content at planting[J]. Agricultural Water Management,2009,96(2):330-336
[26] 王林龙,李清河,徐军,等. 不同种源油蒿形态与生理特征对干旱胁迫的响应[J]. 林业科学,2015,51(2):37-43
[27] 赵丽丽,王普昶,陈超,等. 持续干旱对金荞麦生长、生理生态特性的影响及抗旱性评价[J]. 草地学报,2016,24(4):825-833
[28] 陈亚鹏,陈亚宁,李卫红,等. 干旱胁迫下的胡杨脯氨酸累积特点分析[J]. 干旱区地理,2003,26(4):420-424
[29] 苏波,韩兴国,李凌浩,等. 中国东北样带草原区植物δ¹³C值及水分利用效率对环境梯度的响应[J]. 植物生态学报,2000,24(6):648-655
[30] 蒲光兰,周兰英,胡学华,等. 干旱胁迫对金太阳杏叶绿素荧光动力学参数的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究,2005,23(3):44-48
[31] 徐兴友,张风娟,王子华,等. 燕山地区6种花灌木幼苗耐旱特性的研究[J]. 西北植物学报,2007,27(10):2080-2088
[32] 常雪刚,徐柱,易津,等. 7种鹅观草属植物苗期干旱胁迫的生理评价[J]. 中国草地学报,2011,33(4):44-50
[33] 张琦,魏臻武,闫天芳,等. 燕麦种质资源农艺性状遗传多样性的鉴定评价[J]. 草地学报,2021,29(2):309-316
[34] 喻华平,赵志常,高爱平,等. 基于主成分分析和聚类分析的 23 份黄皮种质资源的品质评价[J]. 热带作物学报,2022,43(7):1357-1364
[35] 王建丽,刘杰淋,朱瑞芬,等. 28份籽粒苋种质资源的主要农艺性状遗传多样性分析[J]. 草地学报,2020,28(4):1050-1059

Comparison and Evaluation of Drought Resistance of 15 Forage-Type Oat Germplasm Materials at Seedling Stage

15份饲用型燕麦种质材料苗期抗旱性比较与评价

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	JIANG Yu-Jia, YU Yuan-Ping, SUN Xiang-Yi, ZHOU Min, WU Chun-Yan, LI Yu-Hua, LIU Ming-Xi. Identification of R2R3-MYB Gene Family and Analysis of its Expression Pattern in Centipedegrass under Drought Stress [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(9): 2628-2641.
[2]	REN Yong-xia, YANG Guan-gen, REN Meng-yu, LI Yi-ran, ZHANG Si-qi, SU Yu-ting, SHANG Ai-min, ZHANG Jia-yin, GUO Yu-pin. Effects of Mix-ensiling Silage Ratio and Additives on the Mixed Silage Quality of Broccoli Residues [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(9): 2868-2874.
[3]	HE Ji-tong, MA Xiang, JU Ze-liang, LIU Yong, LIU Kai-qiang, MA Xiao-long, JIA Zhi-feng. Effects of Intercropping Ratio of Oat and Broad Bean on Photosynthetic Characteristics and Aboveground Biomass of Crops in Alpine regions [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(8): 2399-2408.
[4]	FENG Shu-lin, ZHOU Ting, WANG Jun-li. Responses Characteristics of Leaf Water Potential in Different Growth Stages of Lespedeza bicolor Seedlings to Drought Stress and Rewatering [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(7): 2077-2085.
[5]	YU Si-min, LUO Yong-zhong, KANG Fang-ming, QIU Ying-de, LI Zhuan-tao. Effects of Drought Stress on Growth and Chlorophyll Fluorescence Characteristics of Medicago sativa L. [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(6): 1762-1771.
[6]	HU Wei, LIANG Guo-ling, LIU Kai-qiang, LIU Wen-hui, LI Wen. Study on Lodging Resistance and Its Influencing Factors of 9 Oat Varieties in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(6): 1788-1797.
[7]	NAN Ming, LI Jing, WANG Chang, LI Yong-sheng, XIANG Da-bing, JING Fang, LIU Yan-ming. Comparative Study on Yield and Quality of Spring Sowing Oat at Different Mowing Stages in Northwest Arid Region [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(6): 1878-1885.
[8]	GUO Chang-ying, WANG Wei, PU Xiao-jian, FU Yun-jie, WANG Long-ran, WEI Xiao-li, PENG Dan, XU Cheng-ti. Effect of Plant Row Space on the Forage Value and Soil Characteristics of Forage Oats in Alpine Regions [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(6): 1886-1893.
[9]	CEN Hui-fang, QIAN Wen-wu, ZHU Hui-sen, XIA Fang-shan, DU Li-xia, XU Tao. Effects of Drought Stress on Leaf Microstructure and Photosynthetic Characteristics of Poa pratensis [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(5): 1368-1377.
[10]	HUANG Rong-yan, MENG Wei-shan, ZHU Kun, LIU Dian-hui, ZHAO Zhu-ting, LU Cheng-wei, SUN Zheng-xuan, TANG Kuan-yu, ZHOU Jia-qi, CHENG Yu. Responses of Physiological,Photosynthetic Characteristics and Leaf Surface Micromorphology of Berberis poiretii to Drought Stress [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(5): 1386-1392.
[11]	WANG Zhen-long, DU Jiang, NIU Yong, YAO Tuo. Screening and Growth-promoting characteristics of Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria of Oat Rhizosphere in Alpine Reseeding Grassland of Zoige [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(5): 1406-1413.
[12]	WANG Bo, XIA Fang-shan, DONG Qiu-li, CEN Hui-fang, LI Yin-lin, ZHANG Jie-min. Effect of Exogenous Brassinosteroids Priming on Antioxidant Characteristics of Deteriorated Oat Seeds [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(5): 1461-1468.
[13]	REN Ming-hui, ZHANG Yu-peng, XU Tao, ZHU Hui-sen, CEN Hui-fang. Identification and Expression Analyses of R2R3-MYB Subfamily in Alfalfa under Drought Stress [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(4): 972-983.
[14]	LI Jing, NAN Ming, LIU Yan-ming, ZHANG Cheng-jun, REN Sheng-lan, BIAN Fang. Comprehensive Evaluation of the Yield,Quality and Feeding Performance on Different Oat Varieties [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(4): 1089-1098.
[15]	QUAN Xin, WU Jun-xi, YANG Pei-zhi, YU Cheng-qun, ZHONG Zhi-ming, HU Tian-ming. Study on the Relationship between Productivity and Species in Grassland with Mixed-sowed Gramineous and Leguminous Forages in Lhasa River Valley [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(3): 657-667.