Effects of Different Hormone Types, Concentrations and Soaking Time on Cutting Rooting of Xanthostemon chrysanthus

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2020.06.003

Abstract

Abstract:

Taking semi-lignified branches of Xanthostemon chrysanthus as the cutting and loess+sand (1∶1) as thesubstrates, the effects of different hormone types, concentrations and soaking time on the rooting of X. chrysanthus cuttings was studied by the orthogonal experiment. The most suitable treatment for the rooting was obtained, which would providea theoretical basis and technical support for its cutting propagation. The rooting was mainly in the cortical tissue. The survival rate of cuttings was over 90%. Hormone concentration was the most important factor affecting the rooting, followed by hormone types, and soaking time had the least effect. Range analysis showed that the most suitable factor combination for cutting rooting rate was A₂B₂C₃ (500 mg/L IBA soaked for 2 minutes) or A₂B₃C₁ (200 mg/L IBA soaked for 30 minutes). The most suitable combination for cutting rooting number was A₁B₁C₁ (1000 mg/L NAA soaked for 30 minutes), and A₃B₃C₂ (200 mg/L “Gentaiyang” rooting agent soaked for 10 minutes) was the most suitable for cutting rooting length, the most suitable combination for longest rooting length was A₂B₁C₂ (1000 mg/L IBA soaked for 10 minutes), and the most suitable combination for cutting rooting index was A₁B₁C₁ (1000 mg/L NAA soaked for 30 minutes). The results of principal component analysis combined with range analysis of rooting effect index showed that A₁B₁C₁ (1000 mg/L NAA soaked for 30 minutes) and A₁B₂C₂ (500 mg/L NAA soaked for 10 minutes) were the better combination for survival and rooting. In a word, X. chrysanthus was a plant relatively easy to be used as cuttings. The experimental results could provide a reference for cutting propagation of X. chrysanthus in future production.

Key words: Xanthostemon chrysanthus, cutting propagation, orthogonal design, hormone

CLC Number:

S723.1+32

ZHANG Peijian,GAO Liqiong,SHANG Xiuhua. Effects of Different Hormone Types, Concentrations and Soaking Time on Cutting Rooting of Xanthostemon chrysanthus[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2020, 41(6): 1084-1091.

Figures/Tables 11

References 28

[1]	Ahmad Nazarudin M R, Tsan F Y, Normaniza O, et al. Phenological growth stages of the golden penda tree (Xanthostemon chrysanthus)[J]. Annals of Applied Biology, 2012,161(1):12-15. DOI URL
[2]	Ahmad Nazarudin M R, Tsan F Y, Normaniza O, et al. Growth performance and flowering of Xanthostemon chrysanthus at two urban sites in kuala lumpur, malaysia[J]. Journal of Tropical Forest Science, 2014,26(3):428-434.
[3]	Brophy J J, Goldsack R J, Forster P I. A preliminary examination of the leaf oils of the genus Xanthostemon (Myrtaceae) in Australia[J]. Journal of Essential Oil Research, 2006,18(2):222-230. DOI URL
[4]	陈雪梅, 廖怡, 张育恺, 等. 遮阴处理对金蒲桃生长量及光合参数的影响[J]. 林业与环境科学, 2017,33(2):77-80.
[5]	兰建彬, 刘国花, 唐建民, 等. 黄金蒲桃对低温逆境的生理响应及其抗寒性[J]. 广东农业科学, 2014,41(15):37-42.
[6]	Schreekenberg K, Degrande A, Mbosso C, et al. The social and economic importance of Daeryodesedulis (G. Don) H. J. Lam in southern Cameroon[J]. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods, 2002,12(1-2):15-40. DOI URL
[7]	申凯歌, 张应中, 王明怀, 等. 金黄熊猫促萌及扦插试验研究[J]. 林业科技通讯, 2017(5):34-37.
[8]	和东文, 韦丹玲, 韦增贵, 等. 金蒲桃的扦插繁殖技术研究[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2017,23(23):24-26.
[9]	Mehri H, Mhanna K, Soltane A, et al. Performance of olive cuttings (Olea europaea L.) of different cultivars growing in the agro-climaticconditions of Al-Jouf (Saudi Arabia)[J]. American Journal of Plant Physiology, 2013,8(1):41-49. DOI URL
[10]	Laubscher C P, Ndakidemi P A. Rooting success using IBA auxin on endangered Leucadendron laxum (PROTEACEAE) in differentrooting mediums[J]. African Journal of Biotechnology, 2008,7(19):3437-3442.
[11]	扈红军, 曹帮华, 尹伟伦, 等. 榛子嫩枝扦插生根相关氧化酶活性变化及繁殖技术[J]. 林业科学, 2008,44(6):60-65. DOI URL
[12]	杨庆春, 李国雷. 不同植物生长调节剂对栓皮栎嫩枝扦插的影响[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2017,45(6):12-16, 46.
[13]	张玉臣, 周再知, 梁坤南, 等. 不同植物生长调节剂对白木香扦插生根的影响[J]. 林业科学研究, 2010,23(2):278-282.
[14]	胡勐鸿, 欧阳芳群, 贾子瑞, 等. 欧洲云杉扦插生根影响因子研究与生根力优良单株选择[J]. 林业科学, 2014,50(2):42-49.
[15]	陈庆生, 周鹏, 张敏, 等. 激素和插穗处理对乌饭树扦插生根的影响[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2016,44(4):41-43, 47.
[16]	赵翔, 李清莹, 姜清彬, 等. 不同基质和促根剂对灰木莲嫩枝扦插生根的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2019,43(2):23-30.
[17]	王艺, 贾忠奎, 马履一, 等. 4种植物生长调节剂对红花玉兰嫩枝扦插生根的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2019,55(7):35-45.
[18]	张杰, 李健康, 段安安, 等. 不同质量浓度 NAA、IBA 对栓皮栎、蒙古栎黄化嫩枝扦插生根的影响[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2019,41(7):128-138.
[19]	朱永超, 李彬, 廖伟彪. 3种生长素对蓝叶忍冬枝条扦插生根的影响[J]. 草业科学, 2016,33(1):61-66. DOI URL
[20]	仲兆清, 潘春香. 不同基质、外源激素与扦插时间对油茶扦插育苗的影响[J]. 南方农业学报, 2014,45(4):623-627.
[21]	张博, 兰再平, 马可, 等. 不同激素处理和基质配方对楸树嫩枝扦插生根的影响[J]. 林业科学研究, 2011,24(6):749-753.
[22]	李柠, 陈军, 曹福亮, 等. 枫杨秋季扦插繁殖技术的研究[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2019,39(6):60-65, 83.
[23]	王志敏, 曹均, 张玉平, 等. 5个圆柏优良品种(系)扦插繁殖技术研究[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2019,39(8):62-69.
[24]	李柠, 曹福亮, 李强, 等. 枫杨硬枝扦插生根的研究[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2018,38(10):1-8.
[25]	王书胜, 单文, 张乐华, 等. 基质和IBA浓度对云锦杜鹃扦插生根的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2015,51(9):165-172. DOI URL
[26]	赵云龙, 陈训, 李朝婵. 糙叶杜鹃扦插生根过程中生理生化分析[J]. 林业科学, 2013,49(6):45-51. DOI URL
[27]	闫海霞, 黄昌艳, 关世凯, 等. 5种报春苣苔属植物的叶插繁殖研究[J]. 热带作物学报, 2018,39(1):20-26.
[28]	潘越, 史彦江, 宋锋惠, 等. 不同因素对平欧杂种榛嫩枝扦插生根的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2016,53(6):1034-1041.

处理 Treatment	试验组合 Experiment combined	生根率 Rooting rate/%	生根量 Amount of rooting per plant	平均根长 Mean root length/cm	最长根长 Longest root length/cm	生根效果指数 Root effect index
T1	A₁B₁C₁	57.78±13.87^c	26.74±14.76^a	2.59±1.11^ab	6.00±2.26^ab	3.72±2.07
T2	A₁B₂C₂	75.55±3.86^ab	15.47±8.47^b	2.33±0.74^ab	4.43±0.71^b	2.37±0.18
T3	A₁B₃C₃	60.00±6.67^bc	6.00±4.33^c	0.99±0.88^c	2.33±1.10^ab	0.47±0.47
T4	A₂B₁C₂	37.78±3.85^d	20.22±13.54^b	1.95±1.14^abc	6.73±2.50^a	3.14±2.25
T5	A₂B₂C₃	84.45±3.85^a	9.04±4.06^c	2.20±1.39^ab	5.10±2.26^ab	1.35±0.60
T6	A₂B₃C₁	80.00±6.67^a	8.94±6.68^c	2.50±0.92^ab	4.77±0.57^ab	1.44±0.42
T7	A₃B₁C₃	48.89±10.18^cd	6.21±5.48^c	1.67±1.54^abc	3.87±1.20^ab	0.72±0.45
T8	A₃B₂C₁	60.00±6.67^bc	5.56±2.97^c	1.40±0.72^bc	3.67±0.93^ab	0.52±0.10
T9	A₃B₃C₂	80.00±6.67^a	6.05±2.62^c	2.67±1.31^a	5.73±0.32^ab	1.06±0.10

处理 Treatment	试验组合 Experiment combined	生根率 Rooting rate/%	生根量 Amount of rooting per plant	平均根长 Mean root length/cm	最长根长 Longest root length/cm	生根效果指数 Root effect index
T1	A₁B₁C₁	57.78±13.87^c	26.74±14.76^a	2.59±1.11^ab	6.00±2.26^ab	3.72±2.07
T2	A₁B₂C₂	75.55±3.86^ab	15.47±8.47^b	2.33±0.74^ab	4.43±0.71^b	2.37±0.18
T3	A₁B₃C₃	60.00±6.67^bc	6.00±4.33^c	0.99±0.88^c	2.33±1.10^ab	0.47±0.47
T4	A₂B₁C₂	37.78±3.85^d	20.22±13.54^b	1.95±1.14^abc	6.73±2.50^a	3.14±2.25
T5	A₂B₂C₃	84.45±3.85^a	9.04±4.06^c	2.20±1.39^ab	5.10±2.26^ab	1.35±0.60
T6	A₂B₃C₁	80.00±6.67^a	8.94±6.68^c	2.50±0.92^ab	4.77±0.57^ab	1.44±0.42
T7	A₃B₁C₃	48.89±10.18^cd	6.21±5.48^c	1.67±1.54^abc	3.87±1.20^ab	0.72±0.45
T8	A₃B₂C₁	60.00±6.67^bc	5.56±2.97^c	1.40±0.72^bc	3.67±0.93^ab	0.52±0.10
T9	A₃B₃C₂	80.00±6.67^a	6.05±2.62^c	2.67±1.31^a	5.73±0.32^ab	1.06±0.10

试验号 Experiment	A激素种类 Hormone types	B激素浓度 Hormone concentration/(mg·L^-1)	C激素浸泡时间 Hormone soak time/min
K₁	64.44^b	48.15^b	65.92^a
K₂	67.41^a	73.33^a	64.44^a
K₃	62.96^b	73.33^a	64.44^a
极差R	4.45	25.18	1.48

试验号 Experiment	A激素种类 Hormone types	B激素浓度 Hormone concentration/(mg·L^-1)	C激素浸泡时间 Hormone soak time/min
K₁	64.44^b	48.15^b	65.92^a
K₂	67.41^a	73.33^a	64.44^a
K₃	62.96^b	73.33^a	64.44^a
极差R	4.45	25.18	1.48

试验号 Experiment	A激素种类 Hormone types	B激素浓度 Hormone concentration/(mg·L^-1)	C激素浸泡时间 Hormone soak time/min
K₁	15.23^a	17.18^a	12.89^b
K₂	12.92^b	9.97^b	14.11^a
K₃	5.94^c	6.94^c	7.09^c
极差R	9.29	10.24	5.80