典型固沙植物种子萌发和幼苗生长对土壤水分的响应

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2024.05.11

干旱区研究 ›› 2024, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (5): 830-842.doi: 10.13866/j.azr.2024.05.11 cstr: 32277.14.j.azr.2024.05.11

典型固沙植物种子萌发和幼苗生长对土壤水分的响应

杨竹青¹^,²^,³^,⁴(), 王磊¹^,²^,³^,⁴, 张雪¹^,²^,³^,⁴(), 申建香¹^,²^,³^,⁴, 张伊婧¹^,²^,³^,⁴, 李欣宇¹^,²^,³^,⁴, 张波⁵, 牛金帅⁵

1.宁夏大学生态环境学院，宁夏银川 750021
2.西北土地退化与生态系统恢复国家重点实验室培育基地，宁夏银川 750021
3.西北退化生态系统恢复与重建教育部重点实验室，宁夏银川 750021
4.宁夏黄河湿地生态系统国家定位观测研究站，宁夏银川 750021
5.宁夏中卫沙坡头国家级自然保护区管理局，宁夏中卫 755000

收稿日期:2023-11-04 修回日期:2024-01-02 出版日期:2024-05-15 发布日期:2024-05-29
通讯作者: 张雪. E-mail: zhxue323@163.com
作者简介:杨竹青（1998-），女，硕士研究生，主要从事可持续生态学研究. E-mail: yzq759521190@163.com
基金资助:
宁夏科技创新领军人才项目(2021GKLRLX13);宁夏重点研发计划项目(2022BEG02012);自治区重点研发项目(2021BEG030-08);宁夏自然科学基金项目(2020AAC03108)

Seed germination and seedling growth of typical sand-fixing plants in response to soil moisture

YANG Zhuqing¹^,²^,³^,⁴(), WANG Lei¹^,²^,³^,⁴, ZHANG Xue¹^,²^,³^,⁴(), SHEN Jianxiang¹^,²^,³^,⁴, ZHANG Yijing¹^,²^,³^,⁴, LI Xinyu¹^,²^,³^,⁴, ZHANG Bo⁵, NIU Jinshuai⁵

1. School of Ecology and Environment, Ningxia University, Yinchuan 750021, Ningxia, China
2. Breeding Base for Sate Key Lab oratory of Land Degradation and Ecological Restoration in Northwestern China, Yinchuan 750021, Ningxia, China
3. Key La boratory for Restoration and Reconstruction of Degraded Ecosystems in Northwestern China of Ministry of Education, Yinchuan 750021, Ningxia, China
4. The National Positioning Observation and Research Station for the Yellow River Wetland Ecosystem, Yinchuan 750021, Ningxia, China
5. Ningxia Zhongwei Shapotou National Nature Reserve Administration, Zhongwei 755000, Ningxia, China

Received:2023-11-04 Revised:2024-01-02 Published:2024-05-15 Online:2024-05-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

固沙植物种子萌发和幼苗生长是土地荒漠化治理的决定性环节，土壤水分是影响该环节的主要限制因子。本研究通过室内盆栽实验，以花棒（Hedysarum scoparium）、柠条锦鸡儿（Caragana korshinskii）和沙蒿（Artemisia desertorum）为研究对象，比较分析了不同水分梯度处理下（4%、6%、8%、10%、15%、20%和25%）3种固沙植物的种子萌发特性与幼苗生长过程中的表型特征差异，探讨固沙植物种子萌发和幼苗生长对土壤水分变化的响应。结果表明：（1）随着土壤水分的增加，3种固沙植物的种子萌发特性均存在显著差异（P<0.05）。萌发率均随土壤水分的增加表现出先增加后降低的趋势。其中，花棒在土壤水分为15%、20%时萌发率最高，均为83%；柠条锦鸡儿在土壤水分为10%时萌发率最高，为73%；沙蒿种子萌发率在土壤水分为15%时达到最大值77.5%，随后慢慢降低，但变化不显著。（2） 3种植物的叶面积和根长均随土壤水分的增加呈现先增加后降低的趋势，比叶面积和根冠比呈现先降低后增加的趋势。（3）花棒、柠条锦鸡儿、沙蒿幼苗分别在土壤水分为10%、8%、20%时生物量最高，分别为0.0733 g、0.1142 g和0.0363 g，且地上生物量显著高于地下生物量（P<0.05），但柠条锦鸡儿幼苗对地下生物量分配较花棒和沙蒿更高。（4） 3种固沙植物的SOD活性、POD活性、CAT活性、Pro含量、SS含量以及Chl含量均随土壤水分的增加呈先增高后降低的趋势，而MDA含量、膜透性以及相对含水量呈先降低后升高的趋势。基于以上结果，通过隶属函数法分析得出3种固沙植物分别在土壤水分为15%、8%和8%时幼苗长势最好。因此，后续采用这3种固沙植物进行植被恢复时，除考虑种子自身性状外，还应充分考虑由降雨条件引起的土壤水分的变化，以提高出苗率和幼苗生长的成功率。

关键词: 土壤水分胁迫, 盆栽试验, 种子萌发, 幼苗生长, 表型

Abstract:

Seed germination and the seedling growth of sand-fixing plants are decisive aspects of land desertification management, and soil moisture is the main limiting factor affecting these aspects. In this study, we compared and analyzed the seed germination of three sand-fixing plants under different moisture gradients (4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 15%, 20%, and 25%) in an indoor potting experiment using Hedysarum scoparium, Caragana korshinskii, and Artemisia desertorum to investigate the response of seed germination and seedling growth of sand-fixing plants to changes soil in moisture. The results showed that: (1) significant differences (P<0.05) were observed in the seed germination characteristics of the three sand-fixing plants as the soil moisture increased. The germination rates tended to increase and then decrease as the soil moisture increased. C. scoparium had the highest germination rate at 15% and 20% soil moisture (83.00% in both); C. korshinskii had the highest germination rate at 10% soil moisture (73.00%); and the seed germination rate of A. desertorum reached the maximum value of 77.50% at 15% soil moisture, and then slowly decreased, although the change was not significant. (2) The leaf area and root length of the three plants showed tended to first increase and then decrease as the soil moisture increased, and the specific leaf area and root:crown ratio tended to decrease and then increase. (3) The highest biomass of C. scoparium, C. korshinski, and A. desertorum seedlings was 0.0733 g, 0.1142 g, and 0.0363 g at 10%, 8%, and 20% soil moisture, respectively, and the aboveground biomass was significantly higher than the belowground biomass (P<0.05), although the allocation of belowground biomass by C. korshinski seedlings was higher than that of C. scoparium and A. desertorum. (4) The SOD activity, POD activity, CAT activity, Pro content, SS content, and Chl content of the three sand-fixing plants tended to increase and then decrease as the soil moisture increased, whereas the MDA content, membrane permeability, and relative water content tended to decrease and then increase. Based on the above results, it was concluded that the three sand-fixing plants of C. scoparium, C. korshinski, and A. desertorum had the best seedling growth at 15%, 8% and 8% soil moisture, respectively, through the analysis of the affiliation function method. Therefore, when these three sand-fixing plants are used for vegetation restoration, the changes in soil moisture caused by rainfall conditions should be fully considered in addition to the seeds’ own traits to improve the seedling emergence rate and the success of seedling growth.

Key words: soil moisture stress, pot experiment, seed germination, seedling growth, phenotype

杨竹青, 王磊, 张雪, 申建香, 张伊婧, 李欣宇, 张波, 牛金帅. 典型固沙植物种子萌发和幼苗生长对土壤水分的响应[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(5): 830-842.

YANG Zhuqing, WANG Lei, ZHANG Xue, SHEN Jianxiang, ZHANG Yijing, LI Xinyu, ZHANG Bo, NIU Jinshuai. Seed germination and seedling growth of typical sand-fixing plants in response to soil moisture[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2024, 41(5): 830-842.

图/表 7

表1

表2

图1

图2

图3

图4

表3

不同土壤水分条件下植物表型隶属值及综合评价"

物种	表型指标	土壤水分
物种	表型指标	4%	6%	8%	10%	15%	20%	25%
花棒 C. scoparium	叶面积	0.00	0.33	0.49	0.68	0.61	1.00	0.26
	比叶面积	1.00	0.00	0.24	0.70	0.53	0.40	0.39
	根长	0.21	0.99	1.00	0.96	0.81	0.90	0.00
	根冠比	1.00	0.25	0.11	0.08	0.08	0.21	0.00
	株高	0.00	0.62	0.68	0.92	1.00	0.97	0.39
	地上生物量	0.00	0.74	0.81	1.00	0.97	0.76	0.07
	地下生物量	0.92	0.92	0.82	0.89	0.90	1.00	0.00
	超氧化物歧化酶	0.00	0.61	1.00	0.89	0.86	0.27	0.21
	过氧化物酶	0.20	0.06	0.00	0.02	0.31	0.48	1.00
	丙二醛	0.83	0.72	0.35	0.00	0.38	0.34	1.00
	脯氨酸	0.27	0.47	1.00	0.61	0.31	0.27	0.00
	过氧化氢酶	0.20	0.62	1.00	0.54	0.42	0.40	0.00
	可溶性糖	0.25	0.77	0.89	1.00	0.81	0.36	0.00
	叶绿素	0.67	0.64	0.63	0.86	1.00	0.16	0.00
	电导	1.00	0.31	0.00	0.03	0.41	0.42	0.87
	叶片饱和鲜质量	0.71	0.69	0.00	0.34	0.50	0.53	1.00
	平均	0.43	0.52	0.54	0.57	0.59	0.51	0.32
	名次	6	4	3	2	1	5	7
柠条锦鸡儿C. korshinskii	叶面积	0.00	0.42	0.81	1.00	0.85	0.85	0.36
	比叶面积	0.03	0.00	0.28	0.18	0.51	1.00	0.71
	根长	0.03	0.59	0.72	0.84	1.00	0.90	0.00
	根冠比	0.84	0.56	0.34	0.79	0.82	1.00	0.00
	株高	0.00	1.00	0.87	0.49	0.94	0.65	0.43
	地上生物量	0.00	0.78	1.00	0.67	0.65	0.21	0.06
	地下生物量	0.44	0.89	0.85	1.00	0.98	0.72	0.00
	超氧化物歧化酶	0.68	0.57	1.00	0.58	0.33	0.17	0.00
	过氧化物酶	1.00	0.63	0.59	0.54	0.00	0.07	0.74
	丙二醛	1.00	0.63	0.30	0.00	0.06	0.37	0.45
	脯氨酸	0.67	1.00	0.63	0.36	0.34	0.16	0.00
	过氧化氢酶	0.47	0.74	0.88	1.00	0.56	0.53	0.00
	可溶性糖	0.00	0.24	0.32	0.81	1.00	0.31	0.07
	叶绿素	0.81	0.91	1.00	0.69	0.71	0.24	0.00
	电导	0.46	0.37	0.00	0.15	0.24	0.71	1.00
	叶片饱和鲜质量	0.70	0.35	0.33	0.00	0.19	0.19	1.00
	平均	0.42	0.57	0.59	0.54	0.55	0.49	0.30
	名次	6	2	1	4	3	5	7
沙蒿 A. desertorum	叶面积	0.26	0.54	1.00	0.67	0.82	0.60	0.00
	比叶面积	1.00	0.02	0.22	0.19	0.02	0.00	0.19
	根长	0.41	1.00	0.97	0.32	0.25	0.16	0.00
	根冠比	0.00	0.29	0.85	0.33	0.42	0.45	1.00
	株高	0.00	1.00	0.63	0.59	0.24	0.96	0.18
	地上生物量	0.00	1.00	0.68	0.69	0.68	0.57	0.02
	地下生物量	0.00	0.75	1.00	0.64	0.66	0.64	0.50
	超氧化物歧化酶	0.97	1.00	0.54	0.42	0.08	0.02	0.00
	过氧化物酶	1.00	0.76	0.54	0.22	0.50	0.00	0.76
	丙二醛	0.54	0.44	0.00	0.28	0.41	0.72	1.00
	脯氨酸	0.00	0.22	1.00	0.53	0.20	0.10	0.01
	过氧化氢酶	0.58	1.00	0.89	0.83	0.32	0.21	0.00
	可溶性糖	0.16	0.85	1.00	0.63	0.36	0.12	0.00
	叶绿素	0.81	0.76	1.00	0.54	0.61	0.08	0.00
	电导	1.00	0.00	0.06	0.12	0.46	0.52	0.92
	叶片饱和鲜质量	0.00	0.37	0.67	0.70	1.00	0.75	0.20
	平均	0.40	0.59	0.66	0.46	0.42	0.36	0.30
	名次	5	2	1	3	4	6	7

表3

参考文献 40

[1]	李新荣, 赵洋, 回嵘, 等. 中国干旱区恢复生态学研究进展及趋势评述[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014, 33(11): 1435-1443. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2014.11.001
	[Li Xinrong, Zhao Yang, Hui Rong, et al. Progress and trend of development of restoration ecology research in the arid regions of China[J]. Progress in Geography, 2014, 33(11): 1435-1443.] doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2014.11.001
[2]	Wilczek A M, Burghardt L T, Cobb A R, et al. Genetic and physiological bases for phenological responses to current and predicted climates[J]. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2010, 365(1555): 3129-3147.
[3]	Donohue K, Rafael R, Burghardt L, et al. Germination, Postgermination adaptation, and species ecological ranges[J]. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 2010, 41(1): 293-319.
[4]	Burghardt L T, Metcalf C J E, Wilczek A M, et al. Modeling the influence of genetic and environmental variation on the expression of plant life cycles across landscapes[J]. The American Naturalist, 2015, 185(2): 212-227. doi: 10.1086/679439 pmid: 25616140
[5]	单立山, 李毅, 张正中, 等. 人工模拟降雨格局变化对红砂种子萌发的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(16): 5382-5390.
	[Shan Lishan, Li Yi, Zhang Zhengzhong, et al. Effects of simulated precipitation change on seed germination of Reaumuria soongorica[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(16): 5382-5390.]
[6]	张军红, 吴波. 干旱、半干旱地区土壤水分研究进展[J]. 中国水土保持, 2012, 4(2): 40-43, 68.
	[Zhang Junhong, Wu Bo. Research progress of soil moisture of arid and semi-arid regions[J]. Soil and Water Conservation in China, 2012, 4(2): 40-43, 68.]
[7]	单立山, 李毅, 段桂芳, 等. 模拟降雨变化对两种荒漠植物幼苗生长及生物量分配的影响[J]. 干旱区地理, 2016, 39(6): 1267-1274.
	[Shan Lishan, Li Yi, Duan Guifang, et al. Effects of simulated precipitation on seedling growth and biomass allocation in two tree species in the arid lands of Northwest China[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2016, 39(6): 1267-1274.]
[8]	董蕾, 李吉跃. 植物干旱胁迫下水分代谢、碳饥饿与死亡机理[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(18): 5477-5483.
	[Dong Lei, Li Jiyue. Relationship among drought, hydraulic metabolic, carbon starvation and vegetation mortality[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(18): 5477-5483.]
[9]	李清雪, 贾志清, 何凌仙子, 等. 降雨格局对高寒沙地中间锦鸡儿幼苗生长的影响[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2022, 36(4): 120-125.
	[Li Qingxue, Jia Zhiqing, He Lingxianzi, et al. Effects of precipitation patterns on the growth of Caragana intermedia seedlings in alpine sandy land[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2022, 36(4): 120-125.]
[10]	纪童, 蒋齐, 王占军, 等. 7种禾本科牧草抗旱性研究与评价[J]. 草业学报, 2022, 31(7): 144-156. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2021017
	[Ji Tong, Jiang Qi, Wang Zhanjun, et al. An evaluation of drought resistance of seven Poaceous forages[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2022, 31(7): 144-156.] doi: 10.11686/cyxb2021017
[11]	She W W, Bai Y X, Zhang Y Q, et al. Plasticity in meristem allocation as an adaptive strategy of a desert shrub under contrasting environments[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2017, 8: 1933. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01933 pmid: 29170676
[12]	刘冠志, 李青丰, 贺威, 等. 毛乌素沙地3种主要植物群落的阻沙效益[J]. 水土保持通报, 2016, 36(2): 234-238.
	[Liu Guanzhi, Li Qingfeng, He Wei, et al. Efficiency of sand resistance of three main plant communities in Mu Us Sandland[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016, 36(2): 234-238.]
[13]	于双, 李小伟, 王瑞霞, 等. 灵武白芨滩不同年限柠条固沙林林下草本群落演替规律及机制[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(3): 13-23. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2023150
	[Yu Shuang, Li Xiaowei, Wang Ruixia, et al. Succession mechanism and dynamics in artificial Caragana korshinskii sand-fixing forests of different ages in Baijitan of Lingwu[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2024, 33(3): 13-23.] doi: 10.11686/cyxb2023150
[14]	Bai Yuxuan, Zhang Yuqing, MichaletI Richard, et al. Responses of different herb life-history groups to a dominant shrub species along a dune stabilization gradient[J]. Basic and Applied Ecology, 2019, 38: 1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2019.06.001
[15]	邢海福, 邢存旺, 马增旺, 等. 黄羊滩人工固沙林自然更新的研究[J]. 河北林业科技, 2015(3): 12-15.
	[Xing Haifu, Xing Cunwang, Ma Zengwang, et al. Research on natural regeneration of artificial sand fixation forest in Huangyangtan[J]. The Journal of Hebei Forestry Science and Technology, 2015(3): 12-15.]
[16]	白梦杰. 十种荒漠植物种子萌发与出苗的生态特性研究[D]. 兰州: 兰州大学, 2019.
	[Bai Mengjie. Ecological Characteristics of Seed Germination and Seedling Emergence of Ten Desert Plant Species[D]. Lanzhou: Lanzhou University, 2019.]
[17]	李易珺, 郭树江, 杨自辉. 盐、干旱胁迫对沙蒿种子萌发与幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 草原与草坪, 2023, 43(5): 113-119.
	[Li Yijun, Guo Shujiang, Yang Zihui. Effect of salt and drought stresses on seed germination and seedling physiological characteristics of Artemisia desertorum[J]. Grassland and Turf, 2023, 43(5): 113-119.]
[18]	闫兴富, 周立彪, 思彬彬, 等. 不同温度下PEG-6000模拟干旱对柠条锦鸡儿种子萌发的胁迫效应[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(7): 1989-1996.
	[Yan Xingfu, Zhou Libiao, Si Binbin, et al. Stress effects of simulated drought by polyethylene glycol on the germination of Caragana korshinskii Kom. seeds under different temperature conditions[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016, 36(7): 1989-1996.]
[19]	杨慧, 张泽, 张兰, 等. 柠条种子萌发对不同温度和土壤含水量的响应[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(6): 1875-1884.
	[Yang Hui, Zhang Ze, Zhang Lan, et al. Responses of seed germination of Caragana korshinskii to different temperatures and soil water content[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2022, 39(6): 1875-1884.]
[20]	刘玲, 孟淑春. 2012版《国际种子检验规程》修订通报[J]. 核农学报, 2012, 26(5): 762-763.
	[Liu Ling, Meng Shuchun. Notification of the revision of the 2012 edition of the 《International Seed Testing Regulations》[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2012, 26(5): 762-763.]
[21]	王学奎, 黄见良. 植物生理生化实验原理与技术[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2015.
	[Wang Xuekui, Huang Jianliang. Principles and Techniques of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry Experiments[M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2015.]
[22]	徐新娟, 李勇超. 2种植物相对电导率测定方法比较[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2014, 42(7): 311-312.
	[Xu Xinjuan, Li Yongchao. Comparison of two methods for detection of relative conductivity of plant[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2014, 42(7): 311-312.]
[23]	Zhu Y, Yang X, Baskin C C, et al. Effects of amount and frequency of precipitation and sand burial on seed germination, seedling emergence and survival of the dune grass Leymus secalinus in semiarid China[J]. Plant Soil, 2014, 374(1-2): 399-409.
[24]	杨景宁, 王彦荣. PEG模拟干旱胁迫对四种荒漠植物种子萌发的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2012, 21(6): 23-29.
	[Yang Jingning, Wang Yanrong. Effects of drought stress simulated by PEG on seed germination of four desert plant species[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(6): 23-29.]
[25]	王慧慧, 王普昶, 赵钢, 等. 干旱胁迫下白刺花种子大小与萌发对策[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(2): 335-341.
	[Wang Huihui, Wang Puchang, Zhao Gang, et al. Seed size and germination strategy of Sophora davidii under drought stress[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016, 36(2): 335-341.]
[26]	韩文娟, 王铁娟, 玉昉永. 5种蒿属沙生半灌木种子萌发耐旱性研究[J]. 种子, 2015, 34(2): 42-45.
	[Han Wenjuan, Wang Tiejuan, Yu Fangyong. A Study on drought resistance of five sand plants of artemisia seeds[J]. Seed, 2015, 34(2): 42-45.]
[27]	Ramírez-valiente J A, López R, Hipp A L, et al. Correlated evolution of morphology, gas exchange, growth rates and hydraulics as a response to precipitation and temperature regimes in oaks (Quercus)[J]. New Phytologist, 2020, 227(3): 794-809. doi: 10.1111/nph.16320 pmid: 31733106
[28]	李瑞, 单立山, 解婷婷, 等. 典型荒漠灌木叶片功能性状特征随降水梯度的变化研究[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(3): 425-435.
	[Li Rui, Shan Lishan, Xie Tingting, et al. Variation in the leaf functional traits of typical desert shrubs under precipitation gradient[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(3): 425-435.]
[29]	马丽, 单立山, 解婷婷, 等. 基于同质园实验的两种典型荒漠植物叶片功能性状变异研究[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(3): 701-711. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2022.03.023
	[Ma Li, Shan Lishan, Xie Tingting, et al. Variation in plant functional traits of two typical desert plant based on common garden experiment[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(3): 701-711.] doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2022.03.023
[30]	徐梦琦, 高艳菊, 张志浩, 等. 骆驼刺叶片和根系主要功能性状对水分胁迫的适应[J]. 草业科学, 2021, 38(8): 1559-1569.
	[Xu Mengqi, Gao Yanju, Zhang Zhihao, et al. Adaptation of the main functional trait of Alhagi sparsifolia leaves and roots to soil water stress[J]. Grass Science, 2021, 38(8): 1559-1569.]
[31]	孙岩, 何明珠, 王立. 降水控制对荒漠植物群落物种多样性和生物量的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(7): 2425-2433.
	[Sun Yan, He Mingzhu, Wang Li. Effects of precipitation control on plant diversity and biomass in a desert region[J]. Journal of Ecology, 2018, 38(7): 2425-2433.]
[32]	陈昱东, 吕光辉, 张磊, 等. 荒漠植物功能性状和生物量对土壤水盐环境的响应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(10): 2574-2584. doi: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.10.027
	[Chen Yudong, Lv Guanghui, Zhang Lei, et al. Effects of functional traits of desert plants on biomass in arid regions with different soil water-salt gradients[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(10): 2574-2584.] doi: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.10.027
[33]	杨秀静, 黄玫, 王军邦, 等. 青藏高原草地地下生物量与环境因子的关系[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(7): 2032-2042.
	[Yang Xiujing, Huang Mei, Wang Junbang, et al. Belowground biomass in Tibetan grasslands and its environmental control factors[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(7): 2032-2042.]
[34]	王国华, 赵文智. 不同沙埋深度对当年生柠条锦鸡儿种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 干旱区地理, 2016, 39(1): 95-103.
	[Wang Guohua, Zhao Wenzhi. Effects of sand-burying on seed germination and seedling growth of Caragana korshinskii Kom.[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2016, 39(1): 95-103.]
[35]	李文娆, 张岁岐, 丁圣彦, 等. 干旱胁迫下紫花苜蓿根系形态变化及与水分利用的关系[J]. 生态学报, 2010, 30(19): 5140-5150.
	[Li Wenrao, Zhang Suiqi, Ding Shengyan, et al. Root morphological variation and water use in alfalfa under drought stress[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30(19): 5140-5150.]
[36]	王君, 及利, 张忠辉, 等. 不同土壤基质下水分胁迫对蒙古栎幼苗表型可塑性的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2019, 38(1): 51-59.
	[Wang Jun, Ji Li, Zhang Zhonghui, et al. Effects of water stress on phenotypic plasticity of Quercus mongolica seedlings grown in two soil substrates[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2019, 38(1): 51-59.]
[37]	张寅媛, 刘英, 白龙. 干旱胁迫对4种景天科植物生理生化指标的影响[J]. 草业科学, 2014, 8(4): 724-731.
	[Zhang Yinyuan, Liu Ying, Bai Long. Effect of drought stress on physiological indexes of 4 Crassulaceae species[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2014, 8(4): 724-731.]
[38]	霍红. 河西地区五种荒漠灌木苗期对干旱胁迫的生理响应和抗旱性综合评价[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2010.
	[Huo Hong. Physiological Response to Drought Stress and Drought Resistance Estimation of Five Desert Shrub Seedling in Hexi Region[D]. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University, 2010.]
[39]	丁龙, 赵慧敏, 曾文静, 等. 五种西北旱区植物对干旱胁迫的生理响应[J]. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(5): 1455-1463.
	[Ding Long, Zhao Huimin, Zeng Wenjing, et al. Physiological responses of five plants in Northwest China arid area under drought stress[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2017, 28(5): 1455-1463.]
[40]	张灵. 梭梭对不同程度模拟干旱胁迫的动态生理响应机制[D]. 兰州: 兰州大学, 2015.
	[Zhang Ling. Dynamic Physiological Mechanism of Haloxylon ammodendron Responding to Various Degrees of Modeling Drought Stress[D]. Lanzhou: Lanzhou University, 2015.]

序号	物种名称	来源
1	花棒（Hedysarum scoparium）	宁夏盐池
2	柠条锦鸡儿（Caragana korshinskii）	宁夏中卫沙坡头国家级自然保护区
3	沙蒿（Artemisia desertorum）	宁夏盐池

萌发参数	土壤水分	物种
萌发参数	土壤水分	花棒	柠条锦鸡儿	沙蒿
萌发率（GP）	4%	68±11.55bc	40±15.17b	32.5±11.62d
	6%	75.5±14.09ab	64±5.39a	50±12.65c
	8%	82±6.6a	71.5±7.84a	65±5.7ab
	10%	82.5±3.87a	73±4.85a	75.5±8.28ab
	15%	83±3.32a	72±9a	77.5±10.12a
	20%	83±7.31a	61.5±7.35a	64±3b
	25%	60.5±10.3c	16±5.15c	67.5±12.45ab
萌发速率系数（CGR）	4%	1097.54±109.03b	867.39±110.29b	2451.21±336.54a
	6%	985.69±64.59c	845.86±65.70b	2363.63±167.00a
	8%	980.24±15.94c	837.42±89.47b	2269.18±334.30a
	10%	992.70±27.08c	841.13±63.25b	2080.28±400.38ab
	15%	1104.33±64.02b	830.67±58.63c	1617.02±363.42b
	20%	1003.80±4.39c	862.87±79.15b	2042.73±547.85ab
	25%	1551.54±109.40a	1406.43±206.06a	2158.28±299.11ab
萌发值（GV）	4%	9.01±3.85bc	2.93±1.46cd	0.67±0.36c
	6%	13.28±6.58ab	5.68±0.91b	1.68±0.76bc
	8%	14.29±3.68ab	7.32±2.49ab	2.09±0.96bc
	10%	16.19±0.72a	8.33±2.59a	2.70±0.98ab
	15%	15.83±2.86a	7.10±1.94ab	4.42±2.56a
	20%	15.65±5.38a	4.99±1.86bc	2.40±0.65bc
	25%	5.61±1.99c	0.54±0.31d	2.43±0.80bc
活力指数（VI）	4%	2.58±0.47b	2.31±0.67c	0.78±0.38c
	6%	3.22±0.44a	3.82±0.40ab	1.14±0.35c
	8%	3.50±0.35a	4.06±0.50ab	1.90±0.40b
	10%	3.45±0.12a	3.53±0.77b	2.63±0.66a
	15%	3.38±0.16a	4.50±0.83a	3.15±0.73a
	20%	3.38±0.33a	3.60±0.53b	2.61±0.22ab
	25%	1.67±0.17c	0.50±0.19d	2.73±0.69a
萌发指数（GI）	4%	970.24±249.71b	411.97±156.24c	368.03±119.27d
	6%	1686.51±378.33a	1243.02±225.16b	880.56±256.52b
	8%	1869.06±240.93a	1596.25±325.01ab	1086.39±147.57a
	10%	1946.83±116.19a	1656.80±240.98a	939.52±206.64ab
	15%	1855.66±127.38a	1763.71±220.52a	883.38±60.73b
	20%	1817.19±152.39a	1356.66±236.26b	805.97±102.89bc
	25%	811.53±180.07b	180.30±58.49c	596.65±119.97cd

典型固沙植物种子萌发和幼苗生长对土壤水分的响应

Seed germination and seedling growth of typical sand-fixing plants in response to soil moisture

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 40

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	白事麟, 吕雅雅, 师小军. 不同生境和基质对经过牛消化道的新疆野苹果种子萌发和幼苗生长的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(5): 821-829.
[2]	李娟霞, 白小明, 张翠, 冉福, 李萍, 闫玉邦, 张才忠, 朱雅楠, 陈辉. 不同盐分类型对一年生早熟禾种子萌发和幼苗生长的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(7): 1131-1140.
[3]	王紫瑄, 解甜甜, 王雅茹, 杨杰艳, 杨秀清. 丛枝菌根真菌(AMF)对蒙古沙冬青幼苗的促生特性及作用机制[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(1): 78-89.
[4]	张宗芳, 徐将, 师小军. 新疆野苹果幼苗生长及生物量分配对降水量和降水间隔时间的响应[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(1): 102-110.
[5]	杨慧,张泽,张兰,闫兴富. 柠条种子萌发对不同温度和土壤含水量的响应[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(6): 1875-1884.
[6]	马兴羽,黄彩变,曾凡江,李向义,张玉林,丁雅,高艳菊,徐梦琪. 沙地盐胁迫对油莎豆幼苗生理生长影响的模拟研究[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(6): 1862-1874.
[7]	卡吾沙尔·库都斯,刘会良,张岚,迪力夏旦木·塔什买买提. 尖喙牻牛儿苗春/秋萌植株及子代种子的生理生化特性[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(5): 1473-1485.
[8]	王晶晶,闫海冰,王紫瑄,解甜甜,杨秀清. 断根与IBA处理对沙冬青根系质量及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(1): 230-239.
[9]	雷春英,吉小敏,彭钼植,姜黎. 不同类型盐分对盐爪爪种子萌发和幼苗生长的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2021, 38(5): 1436-1441.
[10]	江沙沙, 孙宗玖, 崔雨萱, 董乙强. 伊犁绢蒿（Seriphidium transiliense）个体功能性状对短期禁牧的可塑性响应[J]. 干旱区研究, 2019, 36(6): 1528-1536.
[11]	孙姗姗, 刘新平, 魏水莲, 张铜会, 何玉惠, 车力木格, 吕朋, 王明明. 沙地植物幼苗生长对降水和风速变化的响应[J]. 干旱区研究, 2019, 36(4): 870-877.
[12]	古丽娜儿?阿不来提，周桂玲，王轶，黄世友，赵文燕. 不同贮藏条件对大赖草种子萌发的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2014, 31(3): 502-507.
[13]	尹海龙, 田长彦, 陈春秀, 任婧, 黄建. 不同盐度施氮水平下盐地碱蓬幼苗生长及光合色素含量分析[J]. 干旱区研究, 2013, 30(5): 887-893.
[14]	李兴, 蒋进, 宋春武, 魏震江, 殷文娟. 保水剂对梭梭（Haloxylon ammodendron）、白梭梭（Haloxylon persicum）种子萌发及幼苗根系的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2012, 29(5): 797-801.
[15]	王凌, 李彦, 尹林克, 陈昌和, 王雷涛, 刘艳丽. 燃煤烟气脱硫镁渣对沙冬青种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2011, 28(6): 1031-1037.