Morphological and Physiological Characteristics of Areca catechu L. Seedlings under Different Soil Moisture Contents

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2020.06.009

Abstract

Abstract:

Five water gradients, T₁: (30±5)%, T₂: (45±5)%, T₃: (60±5)%, T₄: (75±5)%, T₅: (90±5)%, were used to clarify the relationship between soil moisture and areca seedlings (Areca catechu L. seedling). The morphology, photosynthetic characteristics, chlorophyll content and root activity of the seedlings were determined. The result showed that the relative soil water content of about 55%-65% could increase the plant height, stem diameter, leaf area and leaf length. The plant height and stem diameter ratio of the seedlings increased by 26.89% and 19.89% respectively under 25%-35% relative soil water content. And the net photosynthetic rate and transpiration rate of the seedlings reached significant levels. When the relative soil water content was more than 55%-65%, the cracked leaves of the seedlings increased, but the chlorophyll content decreased gradually. When the relative soil water content was less than 55%, the chlorophyll content and root activity of the seedlings decreased. With the decrease of soil relative water content, the root-shoot ratio of the seedlings increased. The chlorophyll content of the seedlings reached the lowest value of 11.16 mg/g under 30% relative soil water content, but the water use efficiency was higher than that in other treatments. The leaves of the seedlings were yellow, and the plants were short, and the root activity was also small. In conclusion, when the relative water content in soil was 55%-65%, it was beneficial to the growth of areca seedlings.

Key words: Areca catechu L. seedling, soil moisture, photosynthetic characteristics, physiological characters

CLC Number:

LI Han,YANG Fusun,LI Changzhen,CHEN Qi,ZHANG Han,JIU Fengfeng,CHEN Caizhi. Morphological and Physiological Characteristics of Areca catechu L. Seedlings under Different Soil Moisture Contents[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2020, 41(6): 1132-1137.

Figures/Tables 5

References 40

[1]	潘瑞炽. 植物生理学[M].7版. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2012.
[2]	Su P X, Liu X M, Zhang L X, et al. Comparison of d ¹³C values and gas exchange of assimilating shoots of desert plants Haloxylon ammodendron and Calligonum mongolicum with other plants [J]. Israel Journal of Plant Sciences, 2013,52(2):87-97. DOI URL
[3]	Bodegom P M V, Sorrell B K, Oosthoek A, et al. Separating the effects of partial submergence and soil oxygen demand on plant physiology[J]. Ecology, 2008,89(1):193-204. URL PMID
[4]	何凌仙子, 贾志清, 刘涛, 等. 植物适应逆境胁迫研究进展[J]. 世界林业研究, 2018,31(2):13-18.
[5]	赵雅静, 翁伯琦, 王义祥, 等. 植物对干旱胁迫的生理生态响应及其研究进展[J]. 福建稻麦科技, 2009,27(2):45-50.
[6]	于文颖, 纪瑞鹏, 冯锐, 等. 不同生育期玉米叶片光合特性及水分利用效率对水分胁迫的响应[J]. 生态学报, 2015,35(9):2902-2909. DOI URL
[7]	韩刚, 赵忠. 不同土壤水分下4种沙生灌木的光合光响应特性[J]. 生态学报, 2010,30(15):4019-4026.
[8]	陈建, 张光灿, 张淑勇, 等. 辽东楤木光合和蒸腾作用对光照和土壤水分的响应过程[J]. 应用生态学报, 2008(6):1185-1190.
[9]	Blum U, Gerig T M. Relationships between phenolic acid concentrations, transpiration, water utilization, leaf area expansionand uptake of phenolic acids: nutrient culture studies[J]. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 2005,31(8):1907-1932. URL PMID
[10]	Guo Q Q, Zhang W H, Li H E. Comparison of photosynjournal and antioxidative protection in Sophora moorcroftiana and Caragana maximovicziana under water stress[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2014,6(5):637-645. DOI URL
[11]	Peng W, Liu Y J, Wu N, et al. Areca catechu L. (Arecaceae): A review of its traditional uses, botany, phytochemistry, pharmacology and toxicology[J]. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 2015,164:340-356. DOI URL PMID
[12]	Yang Y H, Lien Y C, Ho P S, et al. The effects of chewing areca/betel quid with and without cigarette smoking on oral submucous fibrosis and oral mucosal lesions[J]. Oral Diseases, 2005,11(2):88-94. DOI URL PMID
[13]	Hung S L, Chen Y L, Wan H C, et al. Effects of areca nut extracts on the functions of human neutrophils in vitro[J]. Journal of Periodontal Research, 2000,35(4):186-193. URL PMID
[14]	任军方, 王文泉, 唐龙祥. 槟榔的研究概况[J]. 中国农学通报, 2010,26(19):397-400.
[15]	何振革. 海南省槟榔产业发展存在问题及对策[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2007(13):109-110.
[16]	陈思婷, 孙程旭, 曹红星, 等. 干旱胁迫对槟榔幼苗生理生化特性的影响[J]. 江西农业学报, 2009,21(10):70-72.
[17]	陈歆, 杨福孙, 周兆德, 等. 土壤水分胁迫对槟榔幼苗光合特性的影响[J]. 热带农业科学, 2010,30(2):8-12.
[18]	王汀忠, 杨安富, 唐树梅. 海南槟榔平衡施肥的现状与发展前景[J]. 广西热带农业, 2007(4):30-32.
[19]	杨金凤, 郭巧生, 朱再标, 等. 不同水分梯度下垂盆草生长发育、品质及抗氧化活性关系研究[J]. 中草药, 2018,49(14):3382-3388.
[20]	杨建伟, 梁宗锁, 韩蕊莲, 等. 不同干旱土壤条件下杨树的耗水规律及水分利用效率研究[J]. 植物生态学报, 2004(5):630-636.
[21]	Catoni R, Gratani L, Bracco F, et al. How water supply during leaf development drives water stress response in Corylus avellana saplings[J]. Scientia Horticulturae, 2017,214:122-132.
[22]	Zandalinas S I, Mittler R, Balfagón D, et al. Plant adaptations to the combination of drought and high temperatures[J]. Physiologia Plantarum, 2018,162(1):2-12. DOI URL PMID
[23]	马剑, 刘贤德, 孟好军, 等. 水分胁迫对文冠果幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2018,32(1):128-132.
[24]	杨春艳. 设施蔬菜的徒长及其防治[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2013(3):59-60.
[25]	吴飞燕. 不同环境胁迫对3种植物叶绿素荧光参数的影响[D]. 杭州: 浙江农林大学, 2011.
[26]	李志军, 罗青红, 伍维模, 等. 干旱胁迫对胡杨和灰叶胡杨光合作用及叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2009,26(1):45-52.
[27]	童方平, 方伟, 马履一, 等. 水分胁迫下湿地松优良半同胞家系光合色素的响应[J]. 中国农学通报, 2006(11):97-102.
[28]	曾群英, 刘素青, 李林峰, 等. 真红树植物的净光合速率与其相关生理生态因子的关系[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2015,30(3):28-34.
[29]	冯晓东, 路苗苗, 常海飞, 等. 不同土壤相对含水量对梨枣蒸腾速率的影响[J]. 延安大学学报(自然科学版), 2017,36(2):89-92, 97.
[30]	刘亚丽, 王庆成, 杨远彪, 等. 水分胁迫对脂松幼苗生长和光合特性的影响[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2011,39(4):33-36.
[31]	许大全. 光合作用的光抑制[J]. 植物生理学报, 1997,33(6):467.
[32]	刘吉利, 赵长星, 吴娜, 等. 苗期干旱及复水对花生光合特性及水分利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2011,44(3):469-476.
[33]	张淑勇, 夏江宝, 张光灿, 等. 黄刺玫叶片光合生理参数的土壤水分阈值响应及其生产力分级[J]. 生态学报, 2014,34(10):2519-2528.
[34]	刘晓静, 刘佩迎, 张谦, 等. 土壤干旱胁迫对银杏幼苗光合特性的影响[J]. 山东农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018,49(3):467-472.
[35]	王满莲, 唐辉, 韩愈, 等. 水分胁迫与复水对地枫皮生理生态特性的影响[J]. 广西植物, 2017,37(6):716-722.
[36]	杨再强, 邱译萱, 刘朝霞, 等. 土壤水分胁迫对设施番茄根系及地上部生长的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2016,36(3):748-757.
[37]	李洪立, 李琼, 杨福孙, 等. 水分胁迫对槟榔幼苗根系形态与活力的影响[J]. 热带作物学报, 2011,32(11):2016-2019.
[38]	杨苹, 程智敏, 陈叙生, 等. 土壤水分调控对烤烟根系、植株形态及生理特性的影响[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2017,45(9):21-23.
[39]	Sharma B R, Chaudhary T N. Wheat root growth, grain yield and water uptake as influenced by soil water regime and depth of nitrogen placement in a loamy sand soil[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 1983,6(4):365-373.
[40]	Barraclough P B, Kuhlmann H, Weir A H. The effects of prolonged drought and nitrogen fertilizer on root and shoot growth and water uptake by winter wheat[J]. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 1989,163(5):352-360.

处理 Treatment	株高 Height/cm	茎粗 Stem diameter/cm	叶面积 Leaf area/cm²	叶长 Leaf length/cm	裂叶长 Lobed leaf length/cm	根冠比 Root shoot ratio
T₁	37.97±1.24^d	10.12±0.32^ab	546.23±41.37^b	14.68±0.73^c	17.417±0.137^bc	0.486±0.02^a
T₂	44.27±0.38^c	9.06±0.52^b	639.29±14.54^b	15.34±0.62^bc	16.747±0.302^c	0.403±0.03^bc
T₃	46.83±0.12^bc	11.31±0.15^a	718.40±6.19^a	18.25±0.41^a	17.920±0.281^b	0.464±0.02^ab
T₄	51.87±0.98^a	11.29±0.31^a	566.46±65.95^b	15.39±0.10^bc	17.693±0.247^bc	0.368±0.02^cd
T₅	49.67±2.93^ab	10.17±0.47^ab	534.09±61.01^b	17.00±0.546^ab	18.967±0.536^a	0.318±0.02^d

处理 Treatment	株高 Height/cm	茎粗 Stem diameter/cm	叶面积 Leaf area/cm²	叶长 Leaf length/cm	裂叶长 Lobed leaf length/cm	根冠比 Root shoot ratio
T₁	37.97±1.24^d	10.12±0.32^ab	546.23±41.37^b	14.68±0.73^c	17.417±0.137^bc	0.486±0.02^a
T₂	44.27±0.38^c	9.06±0.52^b	639.29±14.54^b	15.34±0.62^bc	16.747±0.302^c	0.403±0.03^bc
T₃	46.83±0.12^bc	11.31±0.15^a	718.40±6.19^a	18.25±0.41^a	17.920±0.281^b	0.464±0.02^ab
T₄	51.87±0.98^a	11.29±0.31^a	566.46±65.95^b	15.39±0.10^bc	17.693±0.247^bc	0.368±0.02^cd
T₅	49.67±2.93^ab	10.17±0.47^ab	534.09±61.01^b	17.00±0.546^ab	18.967±0.536^a	0.318±0.02^d

处理 Treatment	根组织含水量 Water content of root/%	茎组织含水量 Water content of stem/%	叶组织含水量 Water content of leaf/%
T₁	60.71±0.78^c	73.39±0.31^c	68.00±0.40^c
T₂	66.76±1.98^b	75.23±0.21^c	69.24±0.65^c
T₃	70.24±1.01^b	78.70±0.55^b	72.30±0.36^b
T₄	76.02±0.99^a	81.33±0.77^a	73.04±0.21^b
T₅	73.98±0.16^a	82.31±0.87^a	74.51±0.57^a

处理 Treatment	根组织含水量 Water content of root/%	茎组织含水量 Water content of stem/%	叶组织含水量 Water content of leaf/%
T₁	60.71±0.78^c	73.39±0.31^c	68.00±0.40^c
T₂	66.76±1.98^b	75.23±0.21^c	69.24±0.65^c
T₃	70.24±1.01^b	78.70±0.55^b	72.30±0.36^b
T₄	76.02±0.99^a	81.33±0.77^a	73.04±0.21^b
T₅	73.98±0.16^a	82.31±0.87^a	74.51±0.57^a