42份匍匐型花生幼苗对盐胁迫的生理响应

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.10.013

新疆农业科学 ›› 2023, Vol. 60 ›› Issue (10): 2442-2452.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.10.013

• 园艺特产·农产品加工工程 • 上一篇下一篇

42份匍匐型花生幼苗对盐胁迫的生理响应

姚庆¹(), 施俊杰², 侯献飞², 贾东海², 顾元国², 阿里别里根·哈孜太¹, 苗昊翠³(), 李强²()

1.新疆伊犁哈萨克自治州农业科学研究所,新疆伊宁 835000
2.新疆农业科学院经济作物研究所,乌鲁木齐 830091
3.新疆农业科学院农作物品种资源研究所,乌鲁木齐 830091

收稿日期:2023-02-10 出版日期:2023-10-20 发布日期:2023-11-01
通信作者: 苗昊翠(1981-),女,山东青岛人,研究员,研究方向为花生栽培与逆境生理,(E-mail)mc09876@163.com,李强(1980-),男,河南郑州人,研究员,博士,研究方向为油料作物育种与栽培,(E-mail)lq19820302@126.com
作者简介:姚庆(1986-),男,新疆伊犁人,助理研究员,研究方向为新品种引进、选育及作物栽培,(E-mail)452760959@qq.com
基金资助:
新疆维吾尔自治区重大科技专项“油料作物种质资源收集与优异基因挖掘关键技术研究”(2022A03004-4);新疆维吾尔自治区天山英才青年拔尖人才项目(2021-2023年);国家花生产业技术体系“新疆综合试验站”(CARS-13)

Physiological response of 42 creeping peanut cultivars to salt stress at seedling stage

YAO Qing¹(), SHI Junjie², HOU Xianfei², JIA Donghai², GU Yuanguo², Aribelegan Hazzetti¹, MIAO Haocui³(), LI Qiang²()

1. Institute of Agricultural Sciences of Ili Prefecture,Ining Xinjiang 835000,China
2. Institute of Economic Crops,Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Urumqi 830091,China
3. Institute of Crop Variety Resources, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Urumqi 830091, China

Received:2023-02-10 Online:2023-10-20 Published:2023-11-01
Correspondence author: MIAO Haocui (1981-), female, Qingdao, Shandong, researcher, main research direction of peanut cultivation and stress physiology,(E-mail)mc09876@163.com,LI Qiang (1980-), male, researcher, Zhengzhou, Henan province, with major research interests in oil crop breeding and cultivation, (E-mail)lq19820302@126.com
Supported by:
Major R & D Program Project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region "Research on the Key Technology of Oil Crop Germplasm Resource Collection and Excellent Gene Mining"(2022A03004-4);Tianshan Excellent Talents Project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region(2021-2023年);China Agriculture Research System"the Xinjiang Comprehensive Test Station Project"(CARS-13)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】 研究42份匍匐型花生品种在盐胁迫下的生理变化,为筛选耐盐花生品种提供依据。【方法】 利用水培法,在200 mmol/L NaCl胁迫浓度下对参试花生材料幼苗进行胁迫,测定叶片的脯氨酸(Pro)、丙二醛(MDA)、叶绿素(Chl)、可溶性糖4个生理指标,运用隶属函数法进行综合分析。【结果】 (1)幼苗期花生叶片脯氨酸(Pro)含量全部呈上升趋势;(2)丙二醛(MDA)含量除C095、Z5036、Z5081、C094、C108、C128、C141、C145、C145-2、Z5096、Z5108、Z5123、Z5157、Z5185、Z5230、C108-1 16个品种上升外,大多呈现下降趋势,表现出较好的耐盐响应;(3)80%的花生品种叶绿素(Chl)含量较CK上升,而C905、Z5036、Z5040、C035、C087、C129、C135、Z5083、Z5225 9个品种叶绿素含量降低;(4)可溶性糖含量大部分呈现上升趋势,只有Z5035、C001、C087、C128、C135、C141、C145、C145-1、C145-2、Z5028、Z5123、Z5157、Z5225 13个品种叶绿素含量下降,属于盐敏感品种。【结论】 42个匍匐型花生品种分为4类耐盐群体,分别为高耐盐群体、耐盐群体、中等耐盐群体、盐敏感群体。

关键词: 匍匐型花生; NaCl胁迫; 生理指标; 综合抗盐能力

Abstract:

【Objective】 To study the physiological changes of 42 creeping peanut varieties under salt stress.【Methods】 Hydroponic method was used to measure the physiological indexes of proline (Pro), malondialdehyde (MDA), chlorophyll (Chl) and soluble sugar in the leaves of seedlings under the short-term stress concentration of 200 mmol/LNaCl.The comprehensive analysis was carried out by membership function method in order to provide a basis for screening salt-tolerant peanut varieties.【Results】 (1) The proline (Pro) content of peanut leaves increased in seedling stage;(2)The content of malondialdehyde (MDA) increased except for 16 varieties c095, Z5036, Z5081, C094, C108, C128, C141, C145, C145-2, Z5096, Z5108, Z5123, Z5157, Z5185, Z5230, C108-1, and other varieties showed a downward trend and good salt tolerance response.(3) The chlorophyll (Chl) content of 80% peanut varieties increased compared with CK, while the contents of C905, Z5036,Z5040, C035, C087, C129, C135, Z5083, Z5225 decreased.(4) Compared with CK, most of the soluble sugar content showed an upward trend, and only the chlorophyll content of Z5035, C001, C087, C128, C135, C141, C145, C145-1, C145-2, Z5028, Z5123, Z5157,Z5225 decreased, which belonged to salt sensitive varieties.【Conclusion】 Cluster analysis is used to classify 42 creeping peanut varieties into four salt tolerance groups, namely, high salt tolerance group, salt tolerance group, medium salt tolerance group and salt sensitive group.

Key words: creeping peanut; NaCl stress; physiological indicators; comprehensive salt resistance

中图分类号:

S663.1

姚庆, 施俊杰, 侯献飞, 贾东海, 顾元国, 阿里别里根·哈孜太, 苗昊翠, 李强. 42份匍匐型花生幼苗对盐胁迫的生理响应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(10): 2442-2452.

YAO Qing, SHI Junjie, HOU Xianfei, JIA Donghai, GU Yuanguo, Aribelegan Hazzetti, MIAO Haocui, LI Qiang. Physiological response of 42 creeping peanut cultivars to salt stress at seedling stage[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(10): 2442-2452.

图/表 7

参考文献 28

[1]	王艳丽, 杨帆, 李睿瑞, 等. 不同种类盐胁迫对绿豆种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 黑龙江八一农垦大学学报, 2018, 30(5):20-26.
	WANG Liyan, YANG Fan, LI Ruirui, et al. Effect of Different Salt Stress on Germination and Seedling Growth of Mung Bean Seed[J]. Journal of Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University, 2018, 30(5):20-26.
[2]	Wang W, Vinocur B, Altman A. Plant responses to drought,salinity and extreme temperatures:towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance[J]. Planta Berlin, 2003, 218(1):1-14. DOI URL
[3]	贾敬敦, 张富. 依靠科技创新推动我国盐碱地资源可持续利用[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2014, 16(5):1-7.
	JIA Jingdun, ZHANG Fu. Sustainable Utilization of Saline-alkali Land Resources through Scientific and Technological Innovation in China[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2014, 16(5):1-7.
[4]	姚立生. 植物耐盐性多学科的研究进展[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2016.
	YAO Lisheng. Advances in multi-disciplinary studies on salt tolerance of plants[M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2016.
[5]	张炜曼. 浅析中国西北地区土壤盐碱化现状及修复对策[J]. 当代化工研究, 2018,(2):26-27.
	ZHANG Weiman. Analysis on the Present Situation and Restoration Countermeasures of Soil Salinization in Northwest Region of China[J]. Modern Chemical Research, 2018,(2):26-27.
[6]	孙东雷, 卞能飞, 陈志德, 等. 花生萌发期耐盐性综合评价及耐盐种质筛选[J]. 植物遗传资源学报, 2017, 18(6):1079-1087. DOI
	SUN Donslei, BIAN Nengfei, CHEN Zhide, et al. Comprehensive Evaluation of Salt Tolerance and Screening for Salt Tolerant Accessions of Peanut ( Arachis hypogaea L.) at Germination Stage[J]. Journal of Plant GeneticResources, 2017, 18(6):1079-1087.
[7]	吴兰荣, 陈静, 许婷婷, 等. 花生全生育期耐盐鉴定研究[J]. 花生学报, 2005, 34(1):20-24.
	WU Lanrong, CHEN Jing, XU Tingting, et al. Identification of Salt Tolerance in Peanut Growth Duration[J]. Journal o f Peanut Science, 2005, 34(1):20-24.
[8]	李远航, 贺康宁, 张潭, 等. 盐胁迫对黑果枸杞光合生理指标的影响[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2019, 17(1):82-88.
	LI Yuanhang, HE Kangning, ZHANG Tan, et al. Effects of salt stress on the photosynthetic and physiological indexes of Lycium ruthenicum[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 17(1):82-88.
[9]	慈敦伟, 张智猛, 丁红, 等. 花生耐盐性评价方法的比较与应用[J]. 花生学报, 2013, 42(2):28-35.
	CI Dunwei, ZHANG Zhimeng, DING Hong, et al. Comparison and Application of Different Evaluation Methods on Peanut Salt Tolerance[J]. Journal of Peanut Science, 2013, 42(2):28-35.
[10]	胡晓辉, 孙令强, 苗华荣, 等. 不同盐浓度对花生品种耐盐性鉴定指标的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2011,(11):35-37.
	HU Xiaohui, SUN Linqiang, MIAO Huarong, et al. Effects of Different Na Cl Concentrations on Indicators for Evaluating Salt Tolerance of Peanut Varieties[J]. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2011,(11):35-37.
[11]	陈杨, 吕玉英, 杨会, 等. 水培法鉴定花生苗期耐盐性研究[J]. 山东农业科学, 2019, 51(9)125-131.
	CHEN Yang, LYU Yuying, YANG Hui, et al. Study on Salt Tolerance Identification of Peanut at Seedling Stage by Hydroponics[J]. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 51(9)125-131.
[12]	Y Wang Y, Liang C, Meng Z, et al. Leveraging Atriplex hortensis Choline Monooxygenase to Improve Chilling Tolerance in Cotton[J]. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 2019, 162:364-373. DOI URL
[13]	Buysse J A N, Merckx R. An improved colorimetric method to quantify sugar content of plant tissue[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 1993, 44(10):1627-1629. DOI URL
[14]	Masayasu M, Hiroshi Y. A simplified assay method of superoxide dismutase activity for clinical use[J]. Clinica Chimica Acta, 1979, 92(3):337-342. DOI PMID
[15]	Zhu F Y, Chen M X, Chan W L, et al. SWATH-MS quantitative proteomic investigation of nitrogen starvation in Arabidopsis reveals new aspects of plant nitrogen stress responses[J]. Journal of Proteomics, 2018:S1874391918302938-.
[16]	杨淑慎, 高俊凤. 活性氧、自由基与植物的衰老[J]. 西北植物学报, 2001,(2):215-220.
	YANG Shushen, GAO Junfeng. Influence of active oxygen and free radicals on plant senescence[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2001,(2):215-220.
[17]	Lu K X, Cao B H, Feng X P, et al. Photosyntheic response of salt-tolerant and sensitive soybean varieties[J]. Photosynthetica, 2009, 47(3):381-387. DOI URL
[18]	刘华, 舒孝喜, 赵银, 等. 盐胁迫对碱茅生长及碳水化合物含量的影响[J]. 草业科学, 1997, 14(1):18-20.
	LIU Hua, SHU Xiaoxi, ZHAO Yin, et al. Effect of salt stress on growth and carbohydrate contents in puccinellia tenuiflora[J]. Pratacultural Science, 1997, 14(1):18-20.
[19]	张改过. 黑麦草耐盐性的研究[J]. 山西农林科技, 2009, 38(2):19-21.
	ZHANG Gaiguo. Study on Antrsalinity of Lolium perenne[J]. Shanxi Forestry Science and Technology, 2009, 38(2):19-21.
[20]	张春兰, 曹帅, 满丽莉, 等. 不同基因型大豆耐盐性筛选与综合鉴定[J]. 内蒙古民族大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 34(4):342-249.
	ZHANG Chunlan, CAO Shuai, MAN Lili, et al. Screening and Comprehensive Identification of Salt Tolerance of Soybean Genotypes[J]. Journal of Inner Mongolia University for Nationalities, 2019, 34(4):342-249.
[21]	陈学森, 李宪利, 张艳敏, 等. 杏种质资源评价及遗传育种研究进展[J]. 果树学报, 2001,(3):178-181.
	CHEN Xuesen, LI Xianli, ZHANG Yanmin, et al. Advances in Apricot Germplasm Resources Evaluation and Genetic Breeding[J]. Journal of Fruit Science, 2001,(3):178-181.
[22]	李瀚, 杨吉顺, 张冠初, 等. 花生品种萌发期耐盐性比较鉴定[J]. 花生学报, 2015, 44(4):48-52.
	LI Han, YANG Jishun, ZHANG Guanchu, et al. Identification of Salt Tolerance in Germination Period of Peanut Varieties[J]. Journal of Peanut Science, 2015, 44(4):48-52.
[23]	石运庆, 苗华荣, 胡晓辉, 等. 花生耐盐碱性鉴定指标的研究及应用[J]. 核农学报, 2015, 29(3):442-447. DOI
	SHI Yunqing, MIAO Huarong, HU Xiaohui, et al. Research and Application of Saline-alkaline Tolerance Indexes of Peanut[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 29(3):442-447. DOI
[24]	杨圆圆. 花生种质苗期耐盐性鉴定评价[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2016.
	YANG Yuanyuan. Identification of Salt Tolerance at Seedling Stage in Peanut Germplasm[D]. Tai’an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2016.
[25]	高荣嵘, 杨莎, 郭峰, 等. 干旱—盐胁迫对花生幼苗渗透调节物质含量的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2017, 49(8):26-29.
	GAO Rongrong, YANG Sha, GUO Feng, et al. Effects of Intercross Stress of Drought and Salt on Contents of Osmotic Adjustment Substances in Peanut Seedlings[J]. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 49(8):26-29.
[26]	赵英, 何璐洁, 邓平, 等. NaCl胁迫下罗汉果幼苗生长和生理特性的变化[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2020, 48,(15):199-203.
	ZHAO Ying, HE Lujie, DENG Ping, et al. Changes in growth and physiological characteristics of Momordica grosvenorius seedlings under NaCl stress[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 48,(15):199-203.
[27]	温赛群, 丁红, 徐扬, 等. 不同耐盐性花生品种对NaCl胁迫的光合和抗逆生理响应特征[J]. 西北植物学报, 2021, 41(9):1535-1544.
	WEN Saiqun, DING Hong, XU Yang, et al. Physiological Response with Different Salt Characteristics of Resistance under Peanut Varieties NaCI Stress[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2021, 41(9):1535-1544.
[28]	徐晨, 凌风楼, 徐克章, 等. 盐胁迫对不同水稻品种光合特性和生理生化特性的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2013, 27(3):280-286.
	XU Chen, LING Fenglou, XU Kezhang, et al. Effect of Salt Stress on Photosynthetic Characteristics and Physiological and Biochemical Traits of Different Rice Varieties[J]. Chinese Rice Science, 2013, 27(3):280-286.

品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	脯氨酸变幅 Range of proline (%)	品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	脯氨酸变幅 Range of proline (%)
C095	44.86±5.70^EF	926.12±8.29^A	1 964.47	C128	46.74±4.3^EF	791.11±60.17^BC	1 592.58
Z5035	65.31±16.57^CD	934.41±0.00^A	1 330.73	C129	72.17±3.68^CD	936.97±0.00^A	1 198.28
Z5036	53.72±9.59^EF	934.41±0.00^A	1 639.41	C130	66.54±4.10^CD	99.05±4.86^J	48.86
Z5040	55.18±3.74^EF	103.55±15.84^J	87.66	C135	69.41±7.04^CD	265.10±20.74^GH	281.93
Z5069	48.02±3.79^EF	202.66±17.06^HI	322.03	C141	53.24±4.23^EF	634.22±28.44^D	1 091.25
Z5070	70.84±4.82^CD	934.41±0.00^A	1 219.04	C145	53.99±4.01^EF	839.28±14.28^AB	1 454.51
Z5074	77.45±17.61^BC	934.41±0.00^A	1 106.47	C145-1	75.72±13.5^CD	376.29±13.01^F	396.95
Z5076	38.99±3.79^F	332.79±12.41^FG	753.53	C145-2	65.47±1.94^CD	364.20±28.30^F	456.29
Z5081	151.67±32.89^A	934.41±0.00^A	516.08	Z5028	68.21±3.39^CD	936.97±0.00^A	1273.65
C092	52.40±6.20^EF	934.41±0.00^A	1 683.23	Z5083	75.42±1.14^CD	766.80±78.85^BC	916.71
Z5162	78.16±7.15^BC	919.4±15.02^A	1 076.31	Z5205	76.15±6.73^CD	936.97±0.00^A	1 130.43
C001	60.10±5.62^EF	227.7±2.75^HI	278.87	新花19号	59.42±3.23^EF	936.97±0.00^A	1 476.86
C014	81.99±15.23^BC	934.41±0.00^A	1 039.66	Z5096	68.91±6.44^CD	936.97±0.00^A	1 259.70
C035	84.91±17.91^BC	934.41±0.00^A	1 000.47	Z5108	64.79±0.79^CD	936.97±0.00^A	1 346.16
C062	87.20±16.97^BC	934.41±0.00^A	971.57	Z5110	67.56±3.77^CD	499.03±21.97^E	638.65
C087	62.25±0.86^DE	876.18±45.63^AB	1 307.52	Z5123	83.56±7.82^BC	343.16±39.71^FG	310.67
C090	90.94±15.09^BC	206.13±2.3^HI	126.67	Z5157	57.22±3.66^EF	936.97±0.00^A	1 537.49
C094	123.41±22.11^AB	936.97±0.00^A	659.23	Z5185	63.51±6.22^CD	157.20±11.23^IJ	147.52
C108	110.35±13.86^AB	936.97±0.00^A	749.09	Z5225	79.94±8.66^BC	363.17±44.01^F	354.30
C126	62.05±8.15^DE	936.97±0.00^A	1 410.02	Z5230	66.30±1.74^CD	357.10±29.45^F	438.61
C127	52.57±2.18^EF	936.97±0.00^A	1 682.33	C108-1	111.57±19.02^AB	936.97±0.00^A	739.80

品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	脯氨酸变幅 Range of proline (%)	品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	脯氨酸变幅 Range of proline (%)
C095	44.86±5.70^EF	926.12±8.29^A	1 964.47	C128	46.74±4.3^EF	791.11±60.17^BC	1 592.58
Z5035	65.31±16.57^CD	934.41±0.00^A	1 330.73	C129	72.17±3.68^CD	936.97±0.00^A	1 198.28
Z5036	53.72±9.59^EF	934.41±0.00^A	1 639.41	C130	66.54±4.10^CD	99.05±4.86^J	48.86
Z5040	55.18±3.74^EF	103.55±15.84^J	87.66	C135	69.41±7.04^CD	265.10±20.74^GH	281.93
Z5069	48.02±3.79^EF	202.66±17.06^HI	322.03	C141	53.24±4.23^EF	634.22±28.44^D	1 091.25
Z5070	70.84±4.82^CD	934.41±0.00^A	1 219.04	C145	53.99±4.01^EF	839.28±14.28^AB	1 454.51
Z5074	77.45±17.61^BC	934.41±0.00^A	1 106.47	C145-1	75.72±13.5^CD	376.29±13.01^F	396.95
Z5076	38.99±3.79^F	332.79±12.41^FG	753.53	C145-2	65.47±1.94^CD	364.20±28.30^F	456.29
Z5081	151.67±32.89^A	934.41±0.00^A	516.08	Z5028	68.21±3.39^CD	936.97±0.00^A	1273.65
C092	52.40±6.20^EF	934.41±0.00^A	1 683.23	Z5083	75.42±1.14^CD	766.80±78.85^BC	916.71
Z5162	78.16±7.15^BC	919.4±15.02^A	1 076.31	Z5205	76.15±6.73^CD	936.97±0.00^A	1 130.43
C001	60.10±5.62^EF	227.7±2.75^HI	278.87	新花19号	59.42±3.23^EF	936.97±0.00^A	1 476.86
C014	81.99±15.23^BC	934.41±0.00^A	1 039.66	Z5096	68.91±6.44^CD	936.97±0.00^A	1 259.70
C035	84.91±17.91^BC	934.41±0.00^A	1 000.47	Z5108	64.79±0.79^CD	936.97±0.00^A	1 346.16
C062	87.20±16.97^BC	934.41±0.00^A	971.57	Z5110	67.56±3.77^CD	499.03±21.97^E	638.65
C087	62.25±0.86^DE	876.18±45.63^AB	1 307.52	Z5123	83.56±7.82^BC	343.16±39.71^FG	310.67
C090	90.94±15.09^BC	206.13±2.3^HI	126.67	Z5157	57.22±3.66^EF	936.97±0.00^A	1 537.49
C094	123.41±22.11^AB	936.97±0.00^A	659.23	Z5185	63.51±6.22^CD	157.20±11.23^IJ	147.52
C108	110.35±13.86^AB	936.97±0.00^A	749.09	Z5225	79.94±8.66^BC	363.17±44.01^F	354.30
C126	62.05±8.15^DE	936.97±0.00^A	1 410.02	Z5230	66.30±1.74^CD	357.10±29.45^F	438.61
C127	52.57±2.18^EF	936.97±0.00^A	1 682.33	C108-1	111.57±19.02^AB	936.97±0.00^A	739.80

品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	丙二醛变幅 Range of Malondialdeh (%)	品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	丙二醛变幅 Range of Malondialdeh (%)
C095	1.68±0.33^MN	11.68±0.33^MN	56.55	C128	1.32±0.79^MN	221.32±0.79^MN	1 400.76
Z5035	4.18±0.35^IJ	24.18±0.35^IJ	144.74	C129	7.16±1.40^EF	237.16±1.4^EF	-45.39
Z5036	7.10±0.60^EF	37.10±0.60^EF	-43.94	C130	9.57±0.98^CD	249.57±0.98^CD	-66.25
Z5040	4.72±1.59^HI	44.72±1.59^HI	-17.16	C135	5.78±0.61^FG	255.78±0.61^FG	-45.67
Z5069	7.87±0.55^EF	57.87±0.55^EF	-47.78	C141	1.34±0.69^MN	261.34±0.69^MN	223.13
Z5070	3.36±0.58^IJ	63.36±0.58^IJ	-48.51	C145	0.25±0.10^O	270.25±0.10^O	2 016.00
Z5074	3.09±0.44^JK	73.09±0.44^JK	-40.13	C145-1	3.58±1.11^IJ	283.58±1.11^IJ	-8.66
Z5076	10.10±0.79^CD	810.10±0.79^CD	-7.23	C145-2	2.84±1.12^KL	292.84±1.12^KL	20.07
Z5081	8.08±0.88^DE	98.08±0.88^DE	90.84	Z5028	11.50±0.53^CD	3011.50±0.53^CD	-36.96
C092	5.11±1.75^GH	105.11±1.75^GH	-17.22	Z5083	12.93±2.45^BC	3112.93±2.45^BC	-40.53
Z5162	6.90±1.14^EF	116.90±1.14^EF	-81.30	Z5205	5.29±1.22^FG	325.29±1.22^FG	-92.63
C001	12.63±2.47^BC	1212.63±2.47^BC	-88.04	新花19号	2.86±0.26^KL	332.86±0.26^KL	-10.84
C014	27.81±1.80^A	1327.81±1.80^A	-51.38	Z5096	9.65±0.79^CD	349.65±0.79^CD	34.20
C035	7.37±0.77^EF	147.37±0.77^EF	-60.65	Z5108	6.23±0.39^FG	356.23±0.39^FG	582.34
C062	6.86±1.18^EF	156.86±1.18^EF	-47.23	Z5110	24.23±2.29^A	3624.23±2.29^A	-90.55
C087	5.86±0.97^FG	165.86±0.97^FG	-35.84	Z5123	8.05±0.48^DE	378.05±0.48^DE	426.83
C090	4.46±0.72^IJ	174.46±0.72^IJ	-83.18	Z5157	6.19±1.32^FG	386.19±1.32^FG	283.36
C094	1.12±0.50^NO	181.12±0.50^NO	483.93	Z5185	3.37±0.35^IJ	393.37±0.35^IJ	104.45
C108	2.21±0.50^LM	192.21±0.50^LM	114.03	Z5225	16.87±0.79^B	4016.87±0.79^B	-83.05
C126	6.15±1.17^FG	206.15±1.17^FG	-50.41	Z5230	2.41±0.60^KL	412.41±0.60^KL	321.99
C127	5.72±1.31^FG	215.72±1.31^FG	-61.19	C108-1	2.84±0.72^KL	422.84±0.72^KL	471.48

品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	丙二醛变幅 Range of Malondialdeh (%)	品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	丙二醛变幅 Range of Malondialdeh (%)
C095	1.68±0.33^MN	11.68±0.33^MN	56.55	C128	1.32±0.79^MN	221.32±0.79^MN	1 400.76
Z5035	4.18±0.35^IJ	24.18±0.35^IJ	144.74	C129	7.16±1.40^EF	237.16±1.4^EF	-45.39
Z5036	7.10±0.60^EF	37.10±0.60^EF	-43.94	C130	9.57±0.98^CD	249.57±0.98^CD	-66.25
Z5040	4.72±1.59^HI	44.72±1.59^HI	-17.16	C135	5.78±0.61^FG	255.78±0.61^FG	-45.67
Z5069	7.87±0.55^EF	57.87±0.55^EF	-47.78	C141	1.34±0.69^MN	261.34±0.69^MN	223.13
Z5070	3.36±0.58^IJ	63.36±0.58^IJ	-48.51	C145	0.25±0.10^O	270.25±0.10^O	2 016.00
Z5074	3.09±0.44^JK	73.09±0.44^JK	-40.13	C145-1	3.58±1.11^IJ	283.58±1.11^IJ	-8.66
Z5076	10.10±0.79^CD	810.10±0.79^CD	-7.23	C145-2	2.84±1.12^KL	292.84±1.12^KL	20.07
Z5081	8.08±0.88^DE	98.08±0.88^DE	90.84	Z5028	11.50±0.53^CD	3011.50±0.53^CD	-36.96
C092	5.11±1.75^GH	105.11±1.75^GH	-17.22	Z5083	12.93±2.45^BC	3112.93±2.45^BC	-40.53
Z5162	6.90±1.14^EF	116.90±1.14^EF	-81.30	Z5205	5.29±1.22^FG	325.29±1.22^FG	-92.63
C001	12.63±2.47^BC	1212.63±2.47^BC	-88.04	新花19号	2.86±0.26^KL	332.86±0.26^KL	-10.84
C014	27.81±1.80^A	1327.81±1.80^A	-51.38	Z5096	9.65±0.79^CD	349.65±0.79^CD	34.20
C035	7.37±0.77^EF	147.37±0.77^EF	-60.65	Z5108	6.23±0.39^FG	356.23±0.39^FG	582.34
C062	6.86±1.18^EF	156.86±1.18^EF	-47.23	Z5110	24.23±2.29^A	3624.23±2.29^A	-90.55
C087	5.86±0.97^FG	165.86±0.97^FG	-35.84	Z5123	8.05±0.48^DE	378.05±0.48^DE	426.83
C090	4.46±0.72^IJ	174.46±0.72^IJ	-83.18	Z5157	6.19±1.32^FG	386.19±1.32^FG	283.36
C094	1.12±0.50^NO	181.12±0.50^NO	483.93	Z5185	3.37±0.35^IJ	393.37±0.35^IJ	104.45
C108	2.21±0.50^LM	192.21±0.50^LM	114.03	Z5225	16.87±0.79^B	4016.87±0.79^B	-83.05
C126	6.15±1.17^FG	206.15±1.17^FG	-50.41	Z5230	2.41±0.60^KL	412.41±0.60^KL	321.99
C127	5.72±1.31^FG	215.72±1.31^FG	-61.19	C108-1	2.84±0.72^KL	422.84±0.72^KL	471.48

品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	叶绿素变幅 Range of chlorophy (%)	品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	叶绿素变幅 Range of chlorophy (%)
C095	2.02±0.08^AB	1.97±0.14^BC	-2.48	C128	1.78±0.12^AB	1.36±0.03^FG	-23.60
Z5035	1.64±0.08^BC	1.85±0.13^CD	12.80	C129	2.35±0.21^AB	2.32±0.16^BC	-1.28
Z5036	2.16±0.04^AB	1.85±0.16^CD	-14.35	C130	1.51±0.34^BC	2.06±0.2^BC	36.42
Z5040	1.86±0.09^AB	1.80±0.36^CD	-3.23	C135	1.52±0.26^BC	1.81±0.08^CD	19.08
Z5069	1.82±0.30^AB	2.02±0.32^BC	10.99	C141	2.00±0.18^AB	2.13±0.17^BC	6.50
Z5070	2.21±0.21^AB	2.38±0.48^BC	7.69	C145	1.47±0.19^CD	1.51±0.21^DE	2.72
Z5074	1.93±0.25^AB	2.36±0.15^BC	22.28	C145-1	1.15±0.11^F	2.32±0.21^BC	101.74
Z5076	2.14±0.17^AB	2.21±0.09^BC	3.27	C145-2	1.55±0.16^BC	1.85±0.06^CD	19.35
Z5081	1.64±0.25^BC	2.30±0.31^BC	40.24	Z5028	1.52±0.13^BC	1.81±0.05^CD	19.08
C092	1.83±0.10^AB	2.35±0.10^BC	28.42	Z5083	1.63±0.15^BC	1.44±0.14^EF	-11.66
Z5162	1.80±0.31^AB	2.49±0.20^BC	38.33	Z5205	1.83±0.07^AB	1.91±0.1^BC	4.37
C001	1.80±0.20^AB	2.36±0.20^BC	31.11	新花19号	1.85±0.09^AB	4.85±0.19^A	162.16
C014	1.88±0.05^AB	1.98±0.11^BC	5.32	Z5096	1.79±0.06^AB	4.37±0.46^A	144.13
C035	2.61±0.02^A	2.26±0.1^BC	-13.41	Z5108	1.21±0.2^EF	2.10±0.20^BC	73.55
C062	2.00±0.07^AB	2.42±0.18^BC	21.00	Z5110	1.31±0.05^DE	2.00±0.20^BC	52.67
C087	2.35±0.31^AB	2.00±0.06^BC	-14.89	Z5123	1.47±0.07^CD	2.52±0.12^BC	71.43
C090	1.48±0.20^CD	2.55±0.14^BC	72.30	Z5157	1.43±0.12^CD	2.10±0.10^BC	46.85
C094	1.56±0.04^BC	2.81±0.17^B	80.13	Z5185	1.32±0.16^DE	1.99±0.12^BC	50.76
C108	1.75±0.19^BC	2.36±0.19^BC	34.86	Z5225	1.72±0.34^BC	1.08±0.28^G	-37.21
C126	1.76±0.09^BC	2.19±0.09^BC	24.43	Z5230	1.37±0.27^CD	2.16±0.18^BC	57.66
C127	1.58±0.33^BC	2.17±0.12^BC	37.34	C108-1	1.16±0.13^F	2.42±0.19^BC	108.62

42份匍匐型花生幼苗对盐胁迫的生理响应

Physiological response of 42 creeping peanut cultivars to salt stress at seedling stage

在线阅读

PDF下载

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 28

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

编号 Number	名称 Name	来源 Origin	编号 Number	名称 Name	来源 Origin	编号 Number	名称 Name	来源 Origin	编号 Number	名称 Name	来源 Origin
1	C095	河南	12	C001	河南	23	C129	河南	34	Z5096	河南
2	Z5035	河南	13	C014	河南	24	C130	河南	35	Z5108	河南
3	Z5036	河南	14	C035	河南	25	C135	河南	36	Z5110	河南
4	Z5040	河南	15	C062	河南	26	C141	河南	37	Z5123	河南
5	Z5069	河南	16	C087	河南	27	C145	河南	38	Z5157	河南
6	Z5070	河南	17	C090	河南	28	C145-1	河南	39	Z5185	河南
7	Z5074	河南	18	C094	河南	29	C145-2	河南	40	Z5225	河南
8	Z5076	河南	19	C108	河南	30	Z5028	河南	41	Z5230	河南
9	Z5081	河南	20	C126	河南	31	Z5083	河南	42	C108-1	河南
10	C092	河南	21	C127	河南	32	Z5205	河南
11	Z5162	河南	22	C128	河南	33	新花19号	新疆

品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	可溶性糖变幅 Range ofsoluble sugar(%)	品种 Varieties	对照均值± 标准差 Control mean ±SD	处理均值± 标准差 Mean± SD after stress	可溶性糖变幅 Range ofsoluble sugar(%)
C095	3.28±0.96^AB	4.09±0.21^AB	24.70	C128	3.33±0.94^AB	2.94±0.56^AB	-11.71
Z5035	4.04±1.25^A	2.98±0.14^AB	-26.24	C129	1.63±0.08^B	3.36±0.15^AB	106.13
Z5036	1.69±0.13^B	3.22±0.16^AB	90.53	C130	2.50±0.41^AB	2.65±0.21^CD	6.00
Z5040	1.65±0.44^B	3.07±0.13^AB	86.06	C135	3.48±0.37^AB	3.44±0.36^AB	-1.15
Z5069	3.09±0.39^AB	3.58±0.45^AB	15.86	C141	3.07±0.19^AB	2.80±0.08^BC	-8.79
Z5070	2.25±0.16^AB	3.84±0.45^AB	70.67	C145	2.99±0.37^AB	2.59±0.18^CD	-13.38
Z5074	2.05±0.32^AB	3.44±0.38^AB	67.80	C145-1	3.00±0.10^AB	2.27±0.15^DE	-24.33
Z5076	1.97±0.49^AB	3.27±0.26^AB	65.99	C145-2	3.04±0.28^AB	2.55±0.26^CD	-16.12
Z5081	2.53±0.31^AB	2.67±0.13^CD	5.53	Z5028	3.05±0.17^AB	2.56±0.06^CD	-16.07
C092	2.48±0.23^AB	3.12±0.26^AB	25.81	Z5083	2.43±0.07^AB	2.50±0.08^CD	2.88
Z5162	2.14±0.09^AB	2.82±0.32^BC	31.78	Z5205	2.42±0.01^AB	2.89±0.22^AB	19.42
C001	2.43±0.58^AB	2.37±0.24^DE	-2.47	新花19号	2.28±0.34^AB	3.59±0.22^AB	57.46
C014	2.81±0.26^AB	3.19±0.34^AB	13.52	Z5096	1.82±0.20^AB	4.49±0.62^A	146.70
C035	3.01±0.41^AB	4.11±0.23^AB	36.54	Z5108	2.48±0.47^AB	4.35±0.37^AB	75.40
C062	2.86±0.77^AB	3.22±0.06^AB	12.59	Z5110	2.35±0.53^AB	3.05±0.44^AB	29.79
C087	3.43±1.05^AB	3.06±0.60^AB	-10.79	Z5123	2.84±0.21^AB	2.60±0.18^CD	-8.45
C090	2.72±0.23^AB	3.79±0.48^AB	39.34	Z5157	2.88±0.13^AB	2.33±0.03^DE	-19.10
C094	2.69±0.38^AB	2.78±0.67^BC	3.35	Z5185	2.77±0.18^AB	2.87±0.99^AB	3.61
C108	2.64±1.10^AB	3.04±0.62^AB	15.15	Z5225	2.64±0.02^AB	2.09±0.17^E	-20.83
C126	1.81±0.91^AB	3.40±0.59^AB	87.85	Z5230	2.20±0.12^AB	2.37±0.09^DE	7.73
C127	1.88±0.60^AB	2.25±0.14^DE	19.68	C108-1	2.08±0.09^AB	3.26±0.04^AB	56.73

品种 Varieties	综合评价指标Comprehensive evaluation indexes						平均隶属函数值 Average membership function value	抗盐性排序 Rank of salt tolerance
品种 Varieties	可溶性糖 Soluble sugar content	丙二醛 MDA	脯氨酸 Proline content	叶绿素a Chlorophyll a	叶绿素b Chlorophyll b	叶绿素总含量 The total Chlorophyll	平均隶属函数值 Average membership function value	抗盐性排序 Rank of salt tolerance
C095	0.83	0.95	0.99	0.23	0.24	0.24	0.58	10
Z5035	0.37	0.77	1.00	0.19	0.27	0.20	0.47	23
Z5036	0.47	0.91	1.00	0.17	0.32	0.20	0.51	16
Z5040	0.41	0.92	0.01	0.17	0.29	0.19	0.33	38
Z5069	0.62	0.91	0.12	0.24	0.29	0.25	0.41	29
Z5070	0.73	0.97	1.00	0.32	0.45	0.35	0.64	3
Z5074	0.56	0.97	1.00	0.32	0.40	0.34	0.60	6
Z5076	0.49	0.79	0.28	0.30	0.28	0.30	0.41	28
Z5081	0.24	0.64	1.00	0.32	0.35	0.32	0.48	20
C092	0.43	0.91	1.00	0.34	0.33	0.34	0.56	13
Z5162	0.30	0.98	0.98	0.36	0.44	0.37	0.57	11
C001	0.12	0.97	0.15	0.33	0.37	0.34	0.38	33
C014	0.46	0.69	1.00	0.24	0.23	0.24	0.48	22
C035	0.84	0.94	1.00	0.29	0.39	0.31	0.63	4
C062	0.47	0.92	1.00	0.33	0.46	0.36	0.59	7
C087	0.40	0.92	0.93	0.22	0.33	0.25	0.51	17
C090	0.71	0.99	0.13	0.35	0.53	0.39	0.52	15
C094	0.29	0.85	1.00	0.40	0.68	0.46	0.61	5
C108	0.40	0.90	1.00	0.30	0.47	0.34	0.57	12
C126	0.55	0.94	1.00	0.26	0.44	0.30	0.58	9
C127	0.07	0.96	1.00	0.26	0.40	0.29	0.50	19
C128	0.35	0.54	0.83	0.08	0.04	0.08	0.32	40
C129	0.53	0.92	1.00	0.30	0.42	0.33	0.58	8
C130	0.23	0.93	0.00	0.25	0.29	0.26	0.33	39
C135	0.56	0.93	0.20	0.18	0.25	0.19	0.39	32
C141	0.30	0.91	0.64	0.25	0.40	0.28	0.46	24
C145	0.21	0.88	0.88	0.09	0.22	0.11	0.40	31
C145-1	0.08	0.93	0.33	0.27	0.55	0.33	0.42	27
C145-2	0.19	0.93	0.32	0.17	0.35	0.21	0.36	35
Z5028	0.20	0.84	1.00	0.16	0.31	0.19	0.45	26
Z5083	0.17	0.83	0.80	0.11	0.05	0.10	0.34	37
Z5205	0.33	1.00	1.00	0.22	0.22	0.22	0.50	18
新花19号	0.63	0.95	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	0.93	1
Z5096	1.00	0.70	1.00	0.90	0.78	0.87	0.88	2
Z5108	0.94	0.00	1.00	0.23	0.43	0.27	0.48	20
Z5110	0.40	0.95	0.48	0.18	0.48	0.24	0.46	25
Z5123	0.21	0.00	0.29	0.34	0.52	0.38	0.29	41
Z5157	0.10	0.45	1.00	0.25	0.34	0.27	0.40	30
Z5185	0.32	0.85	0.07	0.20	0.40	0.24	0.35	36
Z5225	0.00	0.94	0.32	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.21	42
Z5230	0.12	0.77	0.31	0.24	0.46	0.29	0.37	34
C108-1	0.49	0.62	1.00	0.33	0.44	0.35	0.54	14

[1]	汪天玲, 侯献飞, 施俊杰, 孙全喜, 贾东海, 顾元国, 单世华, 苗昊翠, 李强. 67份匍匐型花生种质资源遗传多样性分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(1): 42-54.
[2]	鞠乐, 齐军仓, 陈培育, 牛银亭, 阴志刚. 干旱胁迫对大麦种子萌发、幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(8): 1879-1886.
[3]	魏迎凤, 张全成, 查慧, 王小丽, 王俊刚. 二甲戊灵对龙葵苗期主要生长发育和生理指标的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(8): 2013-2021.
[4]	肖菁, 刘宁, 许明海, 张金波, 马艳明, 王莉, 徐麟. NaCl胁迫对糜子种子萌发的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(7): 1623-1629.
[5]	王冠玉, 贾平平, 靳娟, 阿布都卡尤木·阿依麦提, 樊丁宇, 赵晓梅, 郝庆, 杨磊, 耿文娟. 高温胁迫对枣花器官生理特性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(6): 1485-1491.
[6]	陈艳, 黄璐瑶, 邓昌蓉, 张彦君, 侯全刚, 邵登魁. 冷害对多茸毛型线辣椒幼苗生理水平的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(6): 1492-1498.
[7]	刘衍晨, 刘志刚, 白新慧, 乔鹏, 徐诚, 白慧敏, 张娟. 蛭石复混基质对辣椒育苗的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(5): 1190-1199.
[8]	陈丽靓, 鲁倩君, 马媛媛, 刘迎, 赵宝龙, 孙军利. 不同葡萄品种的耐盐性比较分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(4): 880-888.
[9]	程利华, 杨红兰, 马清倩, 史莹, 张大伟, Alisher A. Abdullaev, 张道远. 陆地棉种质黄萎病抗性生理鉴定分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(4): 992-1002.
[10]	朱普生, 刘慧英, 曹泽, 刘凯歌, 李雪珍. 外源GSNO对NaCl胁迫下番茄幼苗生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(2): 351-358.
[11]	马媛媛, 李刚, 何旺, 赵宝龙, 鲁倩君, 陈丽靓, 刘迎. 外源褪黑素对NaCl胁迫下草莓幼苗生理特性的缓解效应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(10): 2486-2495.
[12]	肖中林, 闫会转, 高杰, 王思逸, 张旭旭, 艾力西热·尼加提. 不同浓度NaCl和NaHCO₃胁迫对制干辣椒光合特性日变化的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(1): 140-149.
[13]	陈丽靓, 孙军利, 常心怡, 叶家发. 外源ALA对NaCl胁迫下酸枣幼苗叶绿素合成的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(7): 1659-1665.
[14]	廖扭, 刁明, 崔洪鑫, 牛宁, 刘慧英. 花期盐水滴灌对10份番茄种质的主要性状影响及耐盐性评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(10): 2486-2494.
[15]	许盼云, 李春兰, 宋金迪, 王鑫, 程嘉宝, 吴玉霞, 何天明. 不同苹果砧木实生苗对盐碱复合胁迫的生理响应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2021, 58(9): 1694-1703.