Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops ›› 2020, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (11): 2237-2244.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2020.11.013
• Plant Cultivation, Physiology & Biochemistry • Previous Articles Next Articles
WANG Li,ZHANG Xue,ZHAO Xiaozhen,XIAO Tujian,MA Yuhua()
Received:
2019-10-25
Revised:
2020-02-17
Online:
2020-11-25
Published:
2020-12-23
Contact:
MA Yuhua
CLC Number:
WANG Li,ZHANG Xue,ZHAO Xiaozhen,XIAO Tujian,MA Yuhua. Drought Adaptability of Hylocereus undatus[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2020, 41(11): 2237-2244.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.rdzwxb.com/EN/10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2020.11.013
Fig. 1 Effects of drought on soil (A) and stem (B) water content of pitaya seedling * indicated significant differences between control and drought treatment (P<0.05, t test).
项目Item | 对照Control | 干旱处理Drought treatment |
---|---|---|
须根长度/cm | 26.66 | 41.66* |
须根数量 | 16.66 | 32.83* |
Tab. 1 Effects of drought on growth of pitaya root
项目Item | 对照Control | 干旱处理Drought treatment |
---|---|---|
须根长度/cm | 26.66 | 41.66* |
须根数量 | 16.66 | 32.83* |
时间 Time | 气孔开放率 Frequency of opened stomata/% | 气孔开放度 Stomata aperture/μm | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
对照 Control | 干旱处理Drought treatment | 对照 Control | 干旱处理 Drought treatment | |
8:00 | 3.0±1.30d | 0d | 1.71±0.10de | 0f |
12:00 | 0d | 0d | 0f | 0f |
16:00 | 20.2±4.97c | 8.2±2.22cd | 5.14±0.39b | 3.14±0.21c |
20:00 | 76.2±6.98a | 41.6±5.06b | 6.48±0.23a | 5.05±0.14b |
0:00 | 35.2±5.83b | 15.6±4.95cd | 3.43±0.25c | 2.06±0.16d |
4:00 | 17.4±3.43cd | 0d | 1.35±0.06e | 0f |
Tab. 2 Effects of drought on open percentage and open size of stmata aperture in pitaya stem
时间 Time | 气孔开放率 Frequency of opened stomata/% | 气孔开放度 Stomata aperture/μm | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
对照 Control | 干旱处理Drought treatment | 对照 Control | 干旱处理 Drought treatment | |
8:00 | 3.0±1.30d | 0d | 1.71±0.10de | 0f |
12:00 | 0d | 0d | 0f | 0f |
16:00 | 20.2±4.97c | 8.2±2.22cd | 5.14±0.39b | 3.14±0.21c |
20:00 | 76.2±6.98a | 41.6±5.06b | 6.48±0.23a | 5.05±0.14b |
0:00 | 35.2±5.83b | 15.6±4.95cd | 3.43±0.25c | 2.06±0.16d |
4:00 | 17.4±3.43cd | 0d | 1.35±0.06e | 0f |
处理 Treatment | 气孔密度 Stoma density/ (piece·mm-2) | 气孔大小Stoma size | |
---|---|---|---|
长Length/μm | 宽Width/μm | ||
对照 | 26.08±5.27 | 20.17±1.04 | 14.53±1.21 |
干旱 | 22.46±3.64* | 19.26±1.65 | 12.94±0.97* |
Tab. 3 Effect of drought on stoma density andstoma density of stem of pitaya
处理 Treatment | 气孔密度 Stoma density/ (piece·mm-2) | 气孔大小Stoma size | |
---|---|---|---|
长Length/μm | 宽Width/μm | ||
对照 | 26.08±5.27 | 20.17±1.04 | 14.53±1.21 |
干旱 | 22.46±3.64* | 19.26±1.65 | 12.94±0.97* |
时间 Time | 大棚温度Greenhouse temperature /℃ | 老茎表面温度 Temperature of old stem surface /℃ | 嫩茎表面温度 Temperature of young stem surface /℃ | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
对照Control | 干旱处理Drought treatment | 对照Control | 干旱处理Drought treatment | ||
8周 | |||||
9:00 | 26.5 | 30.25±1.06a | 28.85±0.70b | 30.05±0.96a | 29.15±0.70b |
12:00 | 30.5 | 33.70±1.12a | 32.43±0.72b | 32.09±0.96b | 33.40±0.73a |
21:00 | 23.2 | 22.75±0.61a | 22.32±0.18a | 22.44±0.43a | 21.77±0.23b |
10周 | |||||
9:00 | 20.4 | 21.70±0.60a | 20.46±0.14b | 21.48±0.43a | 20.47±0.18b |
12:00 | 25.4 | 24.89±0.29b | 25.37±0.31a | 25.30±0.28ab | 25.75±0.29a |
21:00 | 23.1 | 23.85±0.41a | 22.69±0.18b | 23.69±0.30a | 22.45±0.15b |
12周 | |||||
9:00 | 25.2 | 26.45±0.89b | 26.89±0.79a | 26.51±0.64b | 27.56±0.82a |
12:00 | 32.3 | 33.67±0.35b | 34.25±0.32a | 34.17±0.30a | 34.87±0.63a |
21:00 | 21.9 | 22.13±0.38a | 21.27±0.17b | 22.12±0.36a | 20.94±0.22c |
16周 | |||||
9:00 | 26.7 | 26.69±0.70ab | 26.17±0.40b | 27.39±0.42a | 25.86±1.95b |
12:00 | 29.8 | 30.53±0.76a | 30.68±0.73a | 30.47±0.48a | 30.89±0.71a |
21:00 | 20.4 | 21.12±0.61a | 19.63±0.15bc | 20.93±0.63a | 19.32±0.18c |
Tab. 4 Effects of drought on surface temperature of pitaya stem
时间 Time | 大棚温度Greenhouse temperature /℃ | 老茎表面温度 Temperature of old stem surface /℃ | 嫩茎表面温度 Temperature of young stem surface /℃ | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
对照Control | 干旱处理Drought treatment | 对照Control | 干旱处理Drought treatment | ||
8周 | |||||
9:00 | 26.5 | 30.25±1.06a | 28.85±0.70b | 30.05±0.96a | 29.15±0.70b |
12:00 | 30.5 | 33.70±1.12a | 32.43±0.72b | 32.09±0.96b | 33.40±0.73a |
21:00 | 23.2 | 22.75±0.61a | 22.32±0.18a | 22.44±0.43a | 21.77±0.23b |
10周 | |||||
9:00 | 20.4 | 21.70±0.60a | 20.46±0.14b | 21.48±0.43a | 20.47±0.18b |
12:00 | 25.4 | 24.89±0.29b | 25.37±0.31a | 25.30±0.28ab | 25.75±0.29a |
21:00 | 23.1 | 23.85±0.41a | 22.69±0.18b | 23.69±0.30a | 22.45±0.15b |
12周 | |||||
9:00 | 25.2 | 26.45±0.89b | 26.89±0.79a | 26.51±0.64b | 27.56±0.82a |
12:00 | 32.3 | 33.67±0.35b | 34.25±0.32a | 34.17±0.30a | 34.87±0.63a |
21:00 | 21.9 | 22.13±0.38a | 21.27±0.17b | 22.12±0.36a | 20.94±0.22c |
16周 | |||||
9:00 | 26.7 | 26.69±0.70ab | 26.17±0.40b | 27.39±0.42a | 25.86±1.95b |
12:00 | 29.8 | 30.53±0.76a | 30.68±0.73a | 30.47±0.48a | 30.89±0.71a |
21:00 | 20.4 | 21.12±0.61a | 19.63±0.15bc | 20.93±0.63a | 19.32±0.18c |
Fig. 5 Effects of drought treatment on photosynthetic pigments in pitaya stem Different lowercase letters indicated significant differences between control, drought treatment and different time points (P<0.05, LSD test).
Fig. 6 Effects of drought treatment on chlorophyll fluorescence parameters of pitaya stem * indicated significant differences between control and drought treatment (P<0.05, t test).
[1] | Batra N G, Sharma V, Kumari N. Drought-induced changes in chlorophyll fluorescence, photosynthetic pigments, and thylakoid membrane proteins of Vigna radiata[J]. Journal of Plant Interactions, 2014,9(1):712-721. |
[2] | Medina C L, Machado E C, Pinto J M. Photosynjournal of ‘Valencia’ orange tree grafted on four rootstocks and submitted to water deficit[J]. Bragantia (Brazil), 1998,57(1):1-14. |
[3] |
Claeys H, Inzé D. The agony of choice: how plants balance growth and survival under water-limiting conditions[J]. Plant Physiology, 2013,162(4):1768-1779.
DOI URL PMID |
[4] | 蔡永强, 向青云, 陈家龙, 等. 火龙果的营养成分分析[J]. 经济林研究, 2008,26(4):53-56. |
[5] | Huang Y Q, Yuan W Y, Ling M O, et al. Physiological effect on Hylocereus undulatus under simulated karst soil water deficiency[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2015,6(4):269-275. |
[6] | 郑伟, 王彬, 蔡永强, 等. 火龙果新品种‘黔果2号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2016,43(11):2285-2286. |
[7] | 李加强, 叶耀雄, 李炯祥, 等. 火龙果芽接技术探究[J]. 中国南方果树, 2018,47(2):156-157, 160. |
[8] | 王壮, 王立娟, 蔡永强, 等. 火龙果营养成分及功能性物质研究进展[J]. 中国南方果树, 2014,43(5):25-29. |
[9] | 杨洪元, 黄康晟. 火龙果红色素提取工艺及其性质研究[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2009,15(3):151-152, 147. |
[10] | 贺军虎, 陈业渊, 魏守兴. 火龙果栽培技术[J]. 广西园艺, 2004,15(6):47-48. |
[11] | 王玉丽, 孙居文, 荀守华, 等. 干旱胁迫对东岳红光合特性、叶绿素荧光参数及叶片相对含水量的影响[J]. 山东农业科学, 2017,49(4):46-50. |
[12] | 黄永红, 陈学森, 冯宝春. 果树水分胁迫研究进展[J]. 山东农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2005,36(3):481-484. |
[13] | Abraham E M, Huang B, Bonos S A, et al. Evaluation of drought resistance for Texas bluegrass, Kentucky bluegrass, and their hybrids[J]. Crop Science, 2004,44(5):1746-1753. |
[14] | Nerd A, Neumann P M. Phloem water transport maintains stem growth in a drought-stressed crop cactus (Hylocereus undatus)[J]. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 2004,129(4):486-490. |
[15] |
Gallé A, Feller U. Changes of photosynthetic traits in beech saplings (Fagus sylvatica) under severe drought stress and during recovery[J]. Physiologia Plantarum, 2007,131(3):412-421.
DOI URL PMID |
[16] |
Reynolds-Henne C E, Langenegger A, Mani J, et al. Interactions between temperature, drought and stomatal opening in legumes[J]. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 2010,68(1):37-43.
DOI URL |
[17] | 方学敏. 叶温研究综述[J]. 灌溉排水, 1989,8(2):44-47. |
[18] | 吴强, 须晖, 韩亚东. 日光温室番茄叶温变化特性研究[J]. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2008,39(5):618-620. |
[19] | 简令成, 王红. 逆境植物细胞生物学[M] 北京: 科学出版社, 2009: 115. |
[20] |
Hamanishi E T, Thomas B R, Campbell M M. Drought induces alterations in the stomatal development program in Populus[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2012,63(13):4959-4971.
DOI URL |
[21] | 刘紫娟, 袁蕊, 王娜, 等. 干旱胁迫对八宝景天叶片生理的影响[J]. 山西农业科学, 2018,46(4):548-553. |
[22] | 陈昕, 徐宜凤, 张振英, 等. 干旱胁迫下石灰花楸幼苗叶片的解剖结构和光合生理响应[J]. 西北植物学报, 2012,32(1):111-116. |
[23] | 胡学华, 蒲光兰, 肖千文, 等. 水分胁迫下李树叶绿素荧光动力学特性研究[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2007,15(1):75-77. |
[24] | 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. |
[25] | 郭有燕, 刘宏军, 孔东升, 等. 干旱胁迫对黑果枸杞幼苗光合特性的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2016,36(1):124-130. |
[26] |
Azhar A, Sathornkich J, Rattanawong R, et al. Responses of chlorophyll fluorescence, stomatal conductance, and net photosynjournal rates of four rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) genotypes to drought[J]. Advanced Materials Research, 2014,844:11-14.
DOI URL |
[27] | 吴长艾, 孟庆伟, 邹琦, 等. 小麦不同品种叶片对光氧化胁迫响应的比较研究[J]. 作物学报, 2003,29(3):339-344. |
[1] | YANG Litao, ZHANG Baoqing, ZHU Qiuzhen, LI Zhigang, WANG Weizan, CHEN Wujia, LI Yangrui. Effects of Application of Drought Resistant Sucrose-yield Promoter Sprayed by Aircraft in Large Area of Sugarcane [J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2011, 32(2): 189-197. |
[2] | Ma Yanping Xu ChengXiang Liu Youliang. Specific Structure and Bioactive Components in Leaf Blade of Aloe and the Adaptation to Stresses [J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2010, 31(4): 676-680. |
[3] | Zhu Guopeng, Li Feng, Song Xiqiang, Yang Fusun. Photosynthetic Characteristics of Doritis pulcherrima Lindl. (Orchidaceae) with Two Ecotypes [J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2010, 31(12): 2193-2197. |
[4] | Cai Hua Xia Weiwu Tong yan. Karyotype Analysis and B-Chromosomes Study of Omithoga lum caudatumA it CaiHlua) [J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2007, 28(4): 62-65. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||