全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

荒漠植物梭梭群体和叶片水平气体交换对不同土壤水分的响应

, PP. 226-237

Keywords: 荒漠植物,梭梭,同化箱,群体光合作用,叶片水平光合作用

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

为揭示C4荒漠植物梭梭的抗旱性和适应环境的光合作用特征,在人工控制土壤水分条件下,选择代表性植株,使用改进同化箱和LI-8100土壤碳通量自动测量系统组成的群体光合作用测量系统进行测量.该系统能够自动、连续观测,在测量时光、温环境因子稳定,能够准确测定植物的群体水平光合作用.使用LI-6400测定叶片水平光合作用.在相同土壤水分条件下,群体与叶片水平光合速率存在极显著差异(P<0.001),当土壤水分为田间持水量的50%(土壤含水量约10%)左右时梭梭的光合能力最强,群体光合速率(CAP)日均值为6.22μmolCO2m-2s-1,叶片光合速率(Pn)日均值为20.18μmolCO2m-2s-1,群体为叶片水平的30.8%.升高或降低土壤水分,梭梭的光合能力都下降.CAP与Pn的线性回归关系为CAP=0.20Pn+1.82(r2=0.89,P<0.001).结果表明,适宜的土壤含水量可显著提高梭梭群体和叶片的光合能力,过高的土壤含水量不利于梭梭生长发育.梭梭群体及叶片水平的气体交换对同一水分条件有近似的响应趋势,利用拟合公式,可从叶片水平推算出群体水平的光合速率.

References

[1]  8 Burke J J. Evaluation of source leaf responses to water-deficit stresses in cotton using a novel stress bioassay. Plant Physiol, 2007, 143:108-121
[2]  9 Radwan U A. Photosynthetic and leaf anatomical characteristics of the drought-resistant Balanites aegyptiaca (L.) Del. seedlings.Amer-Eurasian J Agric Environ Sci, 2007, 6: 680-688
[3]  10 Pearcy R W, Ehleringer J. Comparative ecophysiology of C3 and C4 plants. Plant Cell Environ, 1984, 7: 1-13??
[4]  11 Hatch M D. C4 photosynthesis: discovery and resolution. Photosynth Res, 2002, 73: 251-256??
[5]  12 Su P X, Liu X M, Zhang L X, et al. Comparison of δ13C values and gas exchange of assimilating shoots of desert plants Haloxylonammodendron and Calligonum mongolicum with other plants. Isr J Plant Sci, 2004, 52: 87-97??
[6]  13 Jia Z Q, Lu Q, Guo G B, et al. Progress in the study of psammophyte Haloxylon. For Res, 2004, 17: 125-132
[7]  14 Li H S, Zhang X L, Zhou P Z. Effect of different stress pretreatment on drought and chilling resistance of Haloxylon ammodendronseedlings. Arid Zone Res, 1994, 11: 23-27
[8]  15 Su P X, Cheng G D, Yan Q D, et al. Photosynthetic regulation of C4 desert plant Haloxylon ammodendron under drought stress. PlantGrowth Regul, 2007, 51: 139-147
[9]  16 Nijs I, Impens I, Behaeghe T. Leaf and canopy responses of Lolium perenne to long-term elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration.Planta, 1989, 177: 312-320??
[10]  17 Smith W K, Vogelman T C, DeLucia E H, et al. Leaf form and photosynthesis. BioScience, 1997, 47: 785-793??
[11]  18 Bucci S J, Goldstein G, Meinzer F C, et al. Functional convergence in hydraulic architecture and water relations of tropical savanna trees:from leaf to whole plant. Tree Physiol, 2004, 24: 891-899
[12]  19 Tershima I, Hikosaka K. Comparative ecophysiology of leaf and canopy photosynthesis. Plant Cell Environ, 1995, 18: 1111-1128??
[13]  20 Kim S H, Richard C, Bae H H, et al. Canopy photosynthesis, evapotranspiration, leaf nitrogen, and transcription profiles of maize inresponse to CO2 enrichment. Glob Change Biol, 2006, 12: 588-600
[14]  21 Evans J R. Nitrogen and photosynthesis in the flag leaf of wheat (Triticum aestivum L). Plant Physiol, 1983, 72: 297-302??
[15]  22 Ham J M, Owensby C E, Coyne P I. Technique for measuring air flow and carbon dioxide flux in large, open-top chambers. J Environ Qual,1993, 22: 759-766
[16]  23 Fang C, Moncrieff J B. An open-top chamber for measuring soil respiration and the influence of pressure difference on CO2 effluxmeasurement. Funct Ecol, 1998, 12: 319-325??
[17]  24 Burkart S, Manderscheid R, Weigel H. Design and performance of a portable gas exchange chamber system for CO2- and H2O-fluxmeasurements in crop canopies. Environ Exp Bot, 2007, 61: 25-34??
[18]  25 Grau A. A closed chamber technique for field measurement of gas exchange of forage canopies. N Z J Agric Res, 1995, 38: 71-77??
[19]  26 Niinemets U. Photosynthesis and resource distribution through plant canopies. Plant Cell Environ, 2007, 30: 1052-1071??
[20]  27 Leuning R, Sands P S. Theory and practice of a portable photosynthesis instrument. Plant Cell Environ, 1989, 12: 669-678??
[21]  28 Singh J S, Gupta S R. Plant decomposition and soil respiration in terrestrial ecosystems. Bot Rev, 1997, 43: 449-528
[22]  29 Steduto P, Cetink?kü ?, Albrizio R, et al. Automated closed-system canopy-chamber for continuous field-crop monitoring of CO2 and H2Ofluxes. Agric For Meteorol, 2002, 111: 171-186??
[23]  30 Pickering N B, Jones J W, Boote K J. Evaluation of the portable chamber technique for measuring canopy gas exchange by crops. Agric ForMeteorol, 1993, 63: 239-254??
[24]  31 Leadley P W, Drake B G. Open-top chambers for exposing plant canopies to elevated CO2 concentration and for measuring netgas-exchange. Vegetation, 1993, 104/105: 3-15
[25]  32 Medhurst J, Parsby J, Linder S, et al. A whole-tree chamber system for examining tree level physiological responses of field-grown trees toenvironmental variation and climate change. Plant Cell Environ, 2006, 29: 1853-1869??
[26]  33 Müller J, Eschenr?der A, Diepenbrock W. Through-flow chamber CO2/H2O canopy gas exchange system-construction, microclimate, errors,and measurements in a barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) field. Agric For Meteorol, 2009, 149: 214-229??
[27]  34 Angell R, Svejcar T. A chamber design for measuring net CO2 exchange on rangeland. J Range Manage, 1999, 52: 27-31??
[28]  35 Lawlor D W, Cornic G. Photosynthetic carbon assimilation and associated metabolism in relation to water deficits in higher plants. PlantEell Environ, 2002, 25: 275-294
[29]  36 Hikosaka K. Effects of leaf age, nitrogen nutrition and photon flux density on the organization of the photosynthetic apparatus in leaves of avine (Ipomoea tricolor Cav.) grown horizontally to avoid mutual shading of leaves. Planta, 1996, 198: 144-150
[30]  37 Carroll A B, Pallardy S G, Galen C. Drought stress, plant water status and floral trait expression in fireweed, Epilobium angustifoliun(Onagraceae). Am J Bot, 2001, 88: 438-446??
[31]  39 Moriana A, Villalobos F J, Fereres E. Stomatal and photosynthetic responses of olive (Olea europaea L.) leaves to water deficit. Plant CellEnviron, 2002, 25: 395-405
[32]  40 Farquhar G D, Sharkey T D. Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis. Ann Rev Plant Physiol, 1982, 33: 317-345??
[33]  41 Quick W P, Chaves M M, Wendler R, et al. The effect of water stress on photosynthetic carbon metabolism in four species grown underfield conditions. Plant Cell Environ, 1992, 15: 25-35??
[34]  42 Boyer J S, Wong C S, Farquhar G D. CO2 and water vapor exchange across leaf cuticle (epidermis) at various water potentials. Plant Physiol,1997, 114: 185-191
[35]  43 Jones H G. Stomatal control of photosynthesis and transpiration. J Exp Bot, 1998, 49: 387-398??
[36]  38 Sperry J S, Hacke U G, Oren R, et al. Water deficits and hydraulic limits to leaf water supply. Plant Cell Environ, 2002, 25: 251-263??
[37]  53 Cabrera-Bosquet L, Albriziob R, Araus J L, et al. Photosynthetic capacity of field-grown durum wheat under different N availabilities: acomparative study from leaf to canopy. Environ Exp Bot, 2009, 67: 145-152??
[38]  1. Kramer P J, Boyer J S. Water Relations of Plants and Soils. Durham: Academic Press, 1995. 315-484
[39]  2 Fuhrer J. Agroecosystem responses to combinations of elevated CO2, ozone, and global climate change. Agric Eco Environ, 2003, 97: 1-20??
[40]  3 Gimenez C, Mitchell V J, Lawlor D W. Regulation of photosynthetic rate of two sunflower hybrids under water stress. Plant Physiol, 1992,98: 516-524??
[41]  4 Tezara W, Mitchell V J, Driscoll S D, et al. Water stress inhibits plant photosynthesis by decreasing coupling factor and ATP. Nature, 1999,401: 914-917??
[42]  5 Tezara W, Marín O, Rengifo E, et al. Photosynthesis and photoinhibition in two xerophytic shrubs during drought. Photosynthetica, 2005,43: 37-45??
[43]  6 Ruiz M C, Domingo R, Rorrecillas A, et al. Water stress preconditioning to improve drought resistance in young apricot plants. Plant Sci,2000, 156: 245-251??
[44]  7 Subbarao G V, Chauhan Y S, Johansen C. Patterns of osmotic adjustment in pigeon pea-its importance as a mechanism of drought resistance.Eur J Agron, 2000, 12: 239-249??
[45]  44 Mitchell P J, Veneklaas E J, Lambers H, et al. Leaf water relations during summer water deficit: differential responses in turgormaintenance and variation in leaf structure among different plant communities in south-western Australia. Plant Cell Environ, 2008, 31:1791-1802??
[46]  45 Heschel M S, Riginos C. Mechanisms of selection for drought stress tolerance and avoidance in Impatiens Capensis (Balsaminaceae). Am JBot, 2005, 92: 37-44
[47]  46 Boyer J S. Plant productivity and environment. Science, 1982, 218: 443-448??
[48]  47 Knight J D, Livingston N J, van Kessel C. Carbon isotope discrimination and water-use efficiency of six crops under wet and drylandconditions. Plant Cell Environ, 1994, 17: 173-179??
[49]  48 Ueda Y, Nishihara S, Tomita H, et al. Photosynthetic response of Japanese rose species Rosa bracteata and Rosa rugosa to temperature andlight. Sci Hort, 2000, 84: 365-371??
[50]  49 Zhao B Z, Kondo M, Maeda M, et al. Water-use efficiency and carbon isotope discrimination in two cultivars of upland rice during differentdevelopmental stages under three water regimes. Plant Soil, 2004, 261: 61-75??
[51]  50 Zelitch I. The close relationship between net photosynthesis and crop yield: soybean, wheat, barley, sorghum, maize, tobacco. BioScience,1982, 32: 796-802??
[52]  51 Wells R, Meredith J W R, Williford J R. Canopy photosynthesis and its relationship to plant productivity in near-isogenic cotton linesdiffering in leaf morphology. Plant Physiol, 1986, 82: 635-640??
[53]  52 Hileman D R, Huluka G, Kenjige P K, et al. Canopy photosynthesis and transpiration of field-grown cotton exposed to free-air CO2enrichment (FACE) and differential irrigation. Agric For Meteorol, 1994, 70: 189-207??

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133