拔节期杂交中稻对淹水胁迫的响应及指示性指标探讨
网络出版日期: 2017-01-20
基金资助
农业部公益性行业（农业）科研专项（201203032）
Response of Hybrid Mid-season Rice to Flooding and Discussion of Indicative Index at the Jointing Stage
长江中下游地区夏季强降水频发，杂交中稻在拔节期易受涝害影响。为定量揭示淹水胁迫对水稻的影响和科学评估灾损，提供形态学、生理特性和产量结构的数据基础，同时筛选拔节期水稻淹水胁迫后受涝及减产程度的指示性指标，在丰两优香1号拔节期设计了不同淹深（1/4PH、1/2PH、3/4PH和全淹）及不同淹水持续时间（3 d、6 d和9 d）交互试验。结果表明，拔节期杂交中稻受淹后，株高、节间显著伸长，且第2节间伸长速度快于第1节，植株黄叶数显著增多，最长叶片长度显著增长，且株高增长量（YPH）、节间长度（YIL）、黄叶数（YYL）、最长叶片长度（YLL）均与淹涝天数（D）和淹深（H）呈显著的二元一次关系；同一淹水持续时间处理，随着淹水深度的增加，水稻叶片中叶绿素a、叶绿素b含量和可溶性蛋白含量逐渐降低，而可溶性糖含量呈先增高后降低的趋势；剑叶中MDA含量均随淹水历时和淹水深度的增加而升高，在根系中，当淹水持续时间为3 d和6 d时，其MDA含量随淹水深度的增加而升高，但在淹水持续时间为9 d时，表现为先升高后降低，其拐点在1/2 PH淹水深度；同时，在同一淹水持续时间下，随着淹水深度的增加，叶片和根系中SOD活性先升高后降低，而剑叶中POD活性持续升高，且水稻受淹越深，其增加幅度愈大，但在根系中的变化趋势是先升高后降低，拐点出现在淹水第6 d的1/2 PH淹深；拔节期水稻受到不同程度涝害后，结实率和千粒重显著下降，当淹水深度达到株高的1/4且持续6 d，其结实率降低20%以上，产量减少19%以上。灰色关联度和聚类分析表明，叶绿素b、可溶性蛋白和叶绿素a可作为拔节期水稻受涝后的关键性生理指标，用于指示、监测水稻受涝及减产程度。
晏军1,2,吴启侠1,2,朱建强1,2*,徐笑笑1,张露萍1 . 拔节期杂交中稻对淹水胁迫的响应及指示性指标探讨[J]. 中国稻米, 2017 , 23(1) : 17 -25 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2017.01.004
In the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, there is more rainfall in summer, especially in jointing stage of hybrid mid-season rice, so that rice is liable to suffer from waterlogging damage. In order to quantitively reveal the influence of flooding on hybrid mid-season rice growth, scientifically assess the yield loss caused by it, and to provide data base of the morphological, physiological characteristics and yield structure, those indexes presented higher correlation degree with relative yield could be used as key morphological and physiological indexes to indicate the yield reduction level at the jointing stage of hybrid mid-season rice after flooding, a cross test of flooding depth（a quarter, a half, three-quarters and full submerged） and waterlogging duration（3, 6 and 9 days） was done in the jointing stages of hybrid mid-season rice. The results showed that after submergence treatment, the rice height and the internode length all present elongation（the 1rd and 2th internode elongate mainly in the booting stage, the 2rd internode elongating faster）, the yellow leaves number and the longest leaf length of plant increased significantly, which is significant linear positive correlation with the increase of flooding depth and waterlogging duration, A significant correlation of two variables with the first power exists among YPH （plant height growth）, YIL（internode length）, YYL（yellow leaves number）, YLL（longest leaf length）and D（submergence days）, H（submergence depth）; as far as physiological characteristics, under the identical flooding duration, chlorophyll（Chla and Chlb） and soluble protein content of sword leaf was decreased with the increase of waterlogging duration, which has significant negative correlation with flooding depth, but the content of soluble saccharide was increased first and then decreased with the increase of flooding depth, while the MDA content in the sword leaf was significantly positively related with the increase of flooding depth, and in the root was increased first and then decreased when the flooding duration was 9 days, which the turning point was a half submergence depth. At the same time, the activity of SOD in the sword leaf and root was increased first and then decreased with the increase of flooding depth, the activity of POD in sword leaf presents the rising trend with the increase of flooding depth, moreover the severe the waterlogged depth was, the higher the amplification of POD activity could be, and that in root was increased first and then decreased with the increase of flooding depth, which the turning point was a half of submergence for 6 days, under the identical flooding duration. In light of the yield component, the seed setting rate reduced by more than 20% and yield decreased by 19% than that of the control when the rice run into quarter of submergence for 6 days at the jointing stage. Through gray correlation and cluster analysis in this research, it was concluded that Chlb, soluble protein and Chla content could be used as key physiological indexes in evaluating waterlogged and reduction of yield degree after flooding.
[1] 潘澜，薛立. 植物淹水胁迫的生理学机制研究进展[J]. 生态学杂志，2012，31（10）：2662-267.
[2] 宁金花，霍治国，陆魁东，等. 不同生育期淹涝胁迫对杂交稻形态特征和产量的影响[J]. 中国农业气象，2013，34（6）：678-684.
[3] 宁金花，陆魁东，霍治国，等. 拔节期淹涝胁迫对水稻形态和产量构成因素的影响[J]. 生态学杂志，2014，33（7）：1 818-1 825.
[4] 蔺万煌，孙福增，彭克勤，等. 洪涝胁迫对水稻产量及产量构成因素的影响[J]. 湖南农业大学学报，1997（1）：53-57.
[5] 彭克勤，夏石头，李阳生. 涝害对早中稻生理特性及产量的影响[J]. 湖南农业大学学报，2001，27（3）：173-176.
[6] 李阳生，李绍清. 淹涝胁迫对水稻生育后期的生理特性和产量性状的影响[J]. 武汉植物学研究，2000，18（2）：117-122.
[7] Raskin I, Kende H. Role of gibberellin in the growth response of submerged deep water rice[J]. Plant Phys, 1984, 76（4）: 947-950.
[8] Kende H, Van D K E, Cho H T. Deep water rice: A model plant to study stem elongation[J]. Plant Phys, 1998, 118（4）: 1 105-1 110.
[9] Van D S D, Zhou Z, Prinsen E. A comparative molecular-physiological study of submergence response in lowland and deep water rice[J]. Plant Phys, 2001, 125: 955-968.
[10] Fukao T, Harris T, Bailey-serres J. Evolutionary analysis of the Sub1 gene cluster that confers submergence tolerance to domesticated rice [J]. Ann Bot, 2009, 103: 143-150.
[11] 彭斯敏，耿延琢，程勤学，等. 丰两优香1号在湖北省种植表现及其高产栽培技术[J]. 杂交水稻，2009，24（5）：52-53.
[12] 朱建强. 易涝易渍农田排水应用基础研究[M]. 北京：科学出版社，2007：43-44.
[13] 张治安，陈展宇.植物生理学实验指导[M].长春：吉林大学出版社，2008.
[14] Chaoui A, Mazhoudi S, Ghorbal M H. Cadmium and Zinc induction of lipid peroxidation and effects on antioxidant en-zyme activities in bean[J]. Plant Sci, 1997, 127: 139-147.
[15] 李佐同，靳学慧，张亚玲，等. 水稻幼苗可溶性糖及可溶性蛋白含量与抗瘟性的关系[J]. 北方水稻，2009（4）：6-9.
[16] Middelobe A L, Markager S. Depth limits and minimum light requirements of freshwater macrophytes[J]. Freshwater Biol, 1997, 137: 553-568.
[17] 罗文泊，谢永宏，宋凤斌. 洪水条件下湿地植物的生存策略[J]. 生态学杂志，2007，09：1478-1485.
[18] Jackson M B. Ethylene-promoted elongation: an adaptation to submergence stress[J]. Ann Bot, 2008, 101（2）: 229-248.
[19] Hirano T, Koshimura N. Growth and distribution of photo assimilates in floating rice under submergence[J]. Jpn J Tropical Agri, 1995, 39（3）: 177-183.
[20] Naoyoshi Kawano, Osamu Ito, Jun-Ichi Sakagami. Relationship between shoot elongation and dry matter weight during submergence in Oryza sativa L. and O. glaberrima Steud. rice cultivars[J]. Plant Prod Sci, 2008, 11: 316-323.
[21] Jackson M B. Ethylene and responses of plants to soil waterlogging and submergence [J]. Annu Rev Plant Physiol, 1985, 36: 145-174.
[22] Ito O, Ella E, Kawano N. Physiological basis of submergence tolerance in rainfed lowland rice ecosystem[J]. Field Crop Res, 1999, 64: 75-90.
[23] 李乐农. 淹水处理对不同水稻品种碳、氮代谢的影响[J]. 湖南农学院学报，1995，21（3）：235-238.
[24] 李绍清，李阳生，李达模，等. 乳熟期淹水对两系杂交中稻源库特性的影响[J]. 杂交水稻，2000，15（2）：38-40.
[25] Reddy M D. Effect of complete plant submergence on vegetative growth, grain yield and some biochemical change in rice plant[J]. Plant Soil, 985, 87（3）: 365-374.
[26] Palacha M C, Vergara B S. Environmental effects on the resistance of rice seedling to complete submergence[J]. Crop Sci, 1972, 12: 209-212.
[27] Richard B, Rivoal J, Spiteri A, et al. Anaerobic stress induces the transcription and translation of sucrose synthase in rice[J]. Plant Physiol, 1991, 95: 669-674.
[28] 李萍萍，程高峰，张佳华，等. 高温对水稻抽穗扬花期生理特性的影响[J]. 江苏大学学报， 2010，31（2）：1 671-1 675.
[29] 王贺正. 水稻抗旱性研究及其鉴定指标的筛选[D]. 成都：四川农业大学，2007.
[30] Chang W W P, Huang L, Shen M, et al. Patterns of protein synthesis and tolerance of anoxia in root tips of maize seedlings acclimated to a low-oxygen environment and identification of proteins by mass spectrometry[J]. Plant Physiol, 2000, 122（2）: 295-317.
[31] 谭淑端，朱明勇，张克荣，等. 植物对水淹胁迫的响应与适应[J]. 生态学杂志，2009（9）：1 871-1 877.
[32] 孙系巍，宁金花，张艳桂，等. 乳熟期淹涝胁迫对水稻形态特性及产量的影响[J]. 湖南农业科学，2015（6）：27-30.
[33] 张艳贵，宁金花，谢娜，等. 分蘖期淹涝胁迫对水稻形态及产量的影响[J]. 湖南农业科学，2014（7）：14-17.
[34] 宣守丽，石春林，张建华，等. 分蘖期淹水胁迫对水稻地上部物质分配及产量构成的影响[J]. 江苏农业学报，2013（6）：1 199 - 1 204.
[35] 胡江龙，郭林涛，王友华，等. 棉花渍害恢复的生理指示指标探讨[J]. 中国农业科学，2013，46（21）：4 446-4 453.
[36] 冯方剑，宋敏，陈全家，等. 棉花苗期抗旱相关指标的主成分分析及综合评价[J]. 新疆农业大学学报，2011，34（3）：211-217.
[37] Ennahli S, Earl H J. Physiological limitations to photosynthetic carbon assimilation in cotton under water stress[J]. Crop Sci, 2005, 45（4）: 2 374-2 380.
[38] 王贺正，马均，李旭毅，等. 水稻开花期抗性鉴定指标的筛选[J]. 作物学报，2005，31（11）：1 485-1 489.
[39] 周广生，梅方竹，周竹青，等. 小麦不同品种耐湿性生理指标综合评价及其预测[J]. 中国农业科学，2003，36（11）：1 378-1 382.
[40] 高三基，罗俊，张华，等. 甘蔗抗旱性生理生化鉴定指标[J]. 应用生态学报， 2006，17（6）：1 051-1 054.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |