不同基因型马铃薯对干旱胁迫的生理响应

doi:10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2021-0305

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

通过对不同基因型马铃薯干旱胁迫下多种生理指标的综合分析,为马铃薯抗旱性研究提供理论依据,为马铃薯抗旱育种提供种质资源。采用12份不同基因型马铃薯为试验材料,测定不同处理条件下各品种整株内4种渗透调节物质和3种抗氧化酶指标,结合相关分析、隶属函数分析、聚类分析和灰色关联度分析对12份不同基因型马铃薯抗旱性进行综合评价。结果表明,干旱胁迫下,各品种叶绿素含量显著降低,渗透调节物质及抗氧化酶活性显著升高,但各种指标在不同品种中的变化幅度呈显著性差异。生理指标与综合抗旱指数的密切程度顺序为：叶绿素>CAT活性>丙二醛>SOD 活性>可溶性糖>POD 活性。通过综合评价得到抗旱性强的马铃薯品种为135、SOLARA、TACNA和克新23号,抗旱性中等的马铃薯品种为16、费乌瑞它、F8、P、VITESSE和ZORA,抗旱性差的马铃薯品种为SOSNA和冀张14号。

关键词: 马铃薯, 干旱胁迫, 隶属函数分析, 聚类分析, 灰色关联度分析

Abstract:

The objective is to lay theoretical basis for drought resistance research of potato and provide germplasm resources for drought resistance breeding of potato by comprehensively analyzing various physiological indices in different genotypes potato under drought stress. Having 12 different genotypes potato as experimental material,4 osmotic regulatory substances and 3 antioxidant enzyme activities of 12 different genotypes potato under drought stress were measured. The drought resistances of 12 different genotypes potato were evaluated comprehensively by integrating correlation analysis,membership function analysis,cluster analysis and grey correlation analysis with above-mentioned physiological indices. The results indicated that the content of chlorophyll in different genotypes potato decreased dramatically,and the activities of osmotic regulation substances and antioxidant enzymes increased prominently under drought stress,but the variation range of every index in different genotypes potato showed significant difference. The order of the relationship between the physiological indexes and the comprehensive drought resistance index under drought stress was chlorophyll > CAT activity > MDA > soluble sugar > POD activity. In conclusion,the potato varieties with strong drought resistance were 135,SOLARA,TACNA and Kexin 23,while the those with moderate drought resistance were 16,Fiurita,F8,P,VITESSE,ZORA,and the those with poor drought resistance were SOSNA and Jizang 14.

Key words: potato, drought stress, membership function analysis, clustering analysis, grey correlation analysis

于国红, 刘朋程, 李磊, 李明哲, 崔海英, 郝洪波, 郭安强. 不同基因型马铃薯对干旱胁迫的生理响应[J]. 生物技术通报, 2022, 38(5): 56-63.

YU Guo-hong, LIU Peng-cheng, LI Lei, LI Ming-zhe, CUI Hai-ying, HAO Hong-bo, GUO An-qiang. Physiological Responses of Potato in Different Genotypes to Drought Stress[J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2022, 38(5): 56-63.

图/表 9

参考文献 24

[1]	唐洪明. 试论我国马铃薯实生种子(薯)的利用及其生产发展的前景[J]. 中国马铃薯, 1987, 1(3):44-48.
	Tang HM. The utilization of potato seed(tuber)in China and the prospect of its production and development[J]. Chin Potato J, 1987, 1(3):44-48.
[2]	卢福顺. 水分胁迫对马铃薯生理指标和叶片结构的影响[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北农业大学, 2013.
	Lu FS. Effect of drought stress on physiological indexes and structure in leaves of potato(Solanum tuberosum L.)[D]. Harbin: Northeast Agricultural University, 2013.
[3]	谢小玉, 张霞, 张兵. 油菜苗期抗旱性评价及抗旱相关指标变化分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2013, 46(3):476-485.
	Xie XY, Zhang X, Zhang B. Evaluation of drought resistance and analysis of variation of relevant parameters at seedling stage of rapeseed(Brassica napus L.)[J]. Sci Agric Sin, 2013, 46(3):476-485.
[4]	姚春馨, 丁玉梅, 周晓罡, 等. 水分胁迫下马铃薯抗旱相关表型性状的分析[J]. 西南农业学报, 2013, 26(4):1416-1419.
	Yao CX, Ding YM, Zhou XG, et al. Analysis on phenotypic trait of drought resistance of potato under moisture starvation[J]. Southwest China J Agric Sci, 2013, 26(4):1416-1419.
[5]	孙业民, 张俊莲, 王文, 等. PP₃₃₃对干旱胁迫下马铃薯幼苗抗旱性及块茎营养的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2012, 30(6):118-123.
	Sun YM, Zhang JL, Wang W, et al. Influences of PP₃₃₃ on potato seedling drought resistance and tuber nutrient under drought stress[J]. Agric Res Arid Areas, 2012, 30(6):118-123.
[6]	徐红云. 拟南芥Trihelix转录因子AST1调控植物抗旱、耐盐的机制研究[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北林业大学, 2017.
	Xu HY. The mechanism of Arabidopsis Trihelix transcription factor AST1 in drought or salt stress response regulation[D]. Harbin: Northeast Forestry University, 2017.
[7]	Scaramagli S, Biondi S, Leone A, et al. Acclimation to low water potential in potato cell suspension cultures leads to changes in putrescine metabolism[J]. Plant Physiol Biochem, 2000, 38(4):345-351. doi: 10.1016/S0981-9428(00)00750-6 URL
[8]	黎冬华, 刘文萍, 张艳欣, 等. 芝麻耐旱性的鉴定方法及关联分析[J]. 作物学报, 2013, 39(8):1425-1433.
	Li DH, Liu WP, Zhang YX, et al. Identification method of drought tolerance and association mapping for sesame(Sesamum indicum L.)[J]. Acta Agron Sin, 2013, 39(8):1425-1433. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2013.01425 URL
[9]	田又升, 谢宗铭, 吴向东, 等. 水稻种质资源萌发期抗旱性综合鉴定[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2015, 33(4):173-180.
	Tian YS, Xie ZM, Wu XD, et al. Identification of drought tolerance of rice germplasm during germination period[J]. Agric Res Arid Areas, 2015, 33(4):173-180.
[10]	李国瑞, 马宏亮, 胡雯媚, 等. 西南麦区小麦品种萌发期抗旱性的综合鉴定及评价[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2015, 35(4):479-487.
	Li GR, Ma HL, Hu WM, et al. Identification and evaluation of wheat cultivars for drought resistance during germination in southwest area[J]. J Triticeae Crop, 2015, 35(4):479-487.
[11]	高俊凤. 植物生理学实验指导[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2006.
	Gao JF. Experimental guidance for plant physiology[M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2006.
[12]	祁旭升, 王兴荣, 许军, 等. 胡麻种质资源成株期抗旱性评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43(15):3076-3087.
	Qi XS, Wang XR, Xu J, et al. Drought-resistance evaluation of flax germplasm at adult plant stage[J]. Sci Agric Sin, 2010, 43(15):3076-3087.
[13]	尹利, 逯晓萍, 傅晓峰, 等. 高丹草杂交种灰色关联分析与评判[J]. 中国草地学报, 2006, 28(3):21-25, 43.
	Yin L, Lu XP, Fu XF, et al. The grey relation analysis and evaluation of hybrid pacesetter[J]. Chin J Grassland, 2006, 28(3):21-25, 43.
[14]	胡秉民, 张全德. 农业试验统计分析方法[M]. 杭州: 浙江科学技术出版社, 1985.
	Hu BM, Zhang QD. Methods for statistical analysis of agricultural experiments[M]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang Science & Technology Press, 1985.
[15]	Wright PR, Morgan JM, Jessop RS. Turgor maintenance by osmoregulation in Brassica napus and B. juncea under field conditions[J]. Ann Bot, 1997, 80(3):313-319. doi: 10.1006/anbo.1997.0444 URL
[16]	Norouzi M, Toorchi M, Salekdeh G H, etal. Effect of water deficit on growth, grain yield and osmotic adjustment in rapeseed[J]. J Food Agri Environ, 2008, 6(2):312-318.
[17]	张金凤, 陈佩珍, 孙晓波, 等. 干旱对马尾松幼苗光合作用及相关生理的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(1):32-38.
	Zhang JF, Chen PZ, Sun XB, et al. Effects on photosynthetic and resistant physiological characteristics of Pinus massoniana seedlings under drought stress[J]. Chin Agric Sci Bull, 2021, 37(1):32-38.
[18]	晁漫宁, 史新月, 张健龙, 等. 灌浆期持续干旱对小麦光合、抗氧化酶活性、籽粒产量和品质的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2020, 40(4):494-502.
	Chao MN, Shi XY, Zhang JL, et al. Effects of persistent drought at grain filling stage on flag leaf photosynthesis, antioxidant enzyme activity, grain yield and quality of wheat[J]. J Triticeae Crop, 2020, 40(4):494-502.
[19]	刘芬, 屈成, 王悦, 等. 抽穗期干旱复水对机插水稻抗氧化酶活性及根系活力的影响[J]. 南方农业学报, 2020, 51(1):65-71.
	Liu F, Qu C, Wang Y, et al. Effects of drought rewatering at heading stage on antioxidant enzyme activity and root activity of machine-transplanted rice[J]. J South Agric, 2020, 51(1):65-71.
[20]	邵艳军. 高粱、玉米苗期抗旱生理与分子机制的比较研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2005.
	Shao YJ. A comparative study between sorghum and maize on the physiological and molecular mechanism of water stress resistance[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2005.
[21]	李玉华, 范春丽, 雷志华, 等. 两个玉米品种在萌芽期和苗期的干旱耐性比较分析[J]. 西北大学学报:自然科学版, 2020, 50(5):703-710.
	Li YH, Fan CL, Lei ZH, et al. Comparative analysis on drought tolerance of two maize cultivars at germination and seedling stages[J]. J Northwest Univ:Nat Sci Ed, 2020, 50(5):703-710.
[22]	孟庆立, 关周博, 冯佰利, 等. 谷子抗旱相关性状的主成分与模糊聚类分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2009, 42(8):2667-2675.
	Meng QL, Guan ZB, Feng BL, et al. Principal component analysis and fuzzy clustering on drought-tolerance related traits of foxtail millet(Setaria italica)[J]. Sci Agric Sin, 2009, 42(8):2667-2675.
[23]	徐银萍, 潘永东, 刘强德, 等. 大麦种质资源成株期抗旱性鉴定及抗旱指标筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2020, 46(3):448-461. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.91031
	Xu YP, Pan YD, Liu QD, et al. Drought resistance identification and drought resistance indexes screening of barley resources at mature period[J]. Acta Agron Sin, 2020, 46(3):448-461. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.91031 URL
[24]	罗俊杰, 欧巧明, 叶春雷, 等. 重要胡麻栽培品种的抗旱性综合评价及指标筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2014, 40(7):1259-1273.
	Luo JJ, Ou QM, Ye CL, et al. Comprehensive valuation of drought resistance and screening of indices of important flax cultivars[J]. Acta Agron Sin, 2014, 40(7):1259-1273. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2014.01259 URL

材料 Material	抗旱系数 Drought-resistant coefficients						综合抗旱系数 Comprehensive drought-resistant coefficient
材料 Material	叶绿素含量 Chlorophyll content	可溶性糖含量 Soluble sugar content	丙二醛含量 MDA content	SOD 活性 SOD activity	POD 活性 POD activity	CAT 活性 CAT activity	综合抗旱系数 Comprehensive drought-resistant coefficient
135	0.9891	2.8210	2.1743	1.3006	1.3507	7.1739	2.6350
16	0.7895	2.2612	2.3557	1.1914	2.5567	2.2593	1.9023
费乌瑞它Feiwuruita	0.6343	2.1322	1.5417	1.1017	1.5387	4.7619	1.9518
SOLARA	0.8229	4.3188	1.4547	1.2218	1.8907	7.5517	2.8768
TACNA	0.8403	3.1461	1.7186	1.4415	1.6353	4.7407	2.2537
克新23号Kexin23	0.9231	3.4006	1.5005	1.3425	1.2986	6.7143	2.5299
SOSNA	0.5142	2.6919	1.5135	1.1975	1.0985	1.8161	1.4719
冀张14号Jizhang14	0.7367	1.8275	1.0059	1.0732	1.3394	0.9620	1.1575
F8	0.6853	2.2574	2.1830	1.1330	1.9472	5.9667	2.3621
P	0.9343	1.5811	2.5692	1.1487	1.5296	1.5500	1.5522
VITESSE	0.6186	1.6848	1.0750	1.3854	1.7686	2.8200	1.5587
ZORA	0.7855	1.7074	1.1373	1.3396	1.3551	3.0101	1.5559

材料 Material	抗旱系数 Drought-resistant coefficients						综合抗旱系数 Comprehensive drought-resistant coefficient
材料 Material	叶绿素含量 Chlorophyll content	可溶性糖含量 Soluble sugar content	丙二醛含量 MDA content	SOD 活性 SOD activity	POD 活性 POD activity	CAT 活性 CAT activity	综合抗旱系数 Comprehensive drought-resistant coefficient
135	0.9891	2.8210	2.1743	1.3006	1.3507	7.1739	2.6350
16	0.7895	2.2612	2.3557	1.1914	2.5567	2.2593	1.9023
费乌瑞它Feiwuruita	0.6343	2.1322	1.5417	1.1017	1.5387	4.7619	1.9518
SOLARA	0.8229	4.3188	1.4547	1.2218	1.8907	7.5517	2.8768
TACNA	0.8403	3.1461	1.7186	1.4415	1.6353	4.7407	2.2537
克新23号Kexin23	0.9231	3.4006	1.5005	1.3425	1.2986	6.7143	2.5299
SOSNA	0.5142	2.6919	1.5135	1.1975	1.0985	1.8161	1.4719
冀张14号Jizhang14	0.7367	1.8275	1.0059	1.0732	1.3394	0.9620	1.1575
F8	0.6853	2.2574	2.1830	1.1330	1.9472	5.9667	2.3621
P	0.9343	1.5811	2.5692	1.1487	1.5296	1.5500	1.5522
VITESSE	0.6186	1.6848	1.0750	1.3854	1.7686	2.8200	1.5587
ZORA	0.7855	1.7074	1.1373	1.3396	1.3551	3.0101	1.5559

指标 Parameter	次数 Times
指标 Parameter	4≤PI	3.5≤PI<4.0	3≤PI<3.5	2.5≤PI<3.0	2.0≤PI<2.5	1.5≤PI<2.0	1.0≤PI<1.5	0.5≤PI<1.0	0≤PI<0.5
叶绿素Chlorophyll	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	12	0
可溶性糖Soluble sugar	1	0	2	2	3	4	0	0	0
MDA	0	0	0	1	3	4	3	0	0
SOD	0	0	0	0	0	0	12	0	0
POD	0	0	0	1	0	6	5	0	0
CAT	6	0	1	1	1	2	0	1	0

指标 Parameter	次数 Times
指标 Parameter	4≤PI	3.5≤PI<4.0	3≤PI<3.5	2.5≤PI<3.0	2.0≤PI<2.5	1.5≤PI<2.0	1.0≤PI<1.5	0.5≤PI<1.0	0≤PI<0.5
叶绿素Chlorophyll	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	12	0
可溶性糖Soluble sugar	1	0	2	2	3	4	0	0	0
MDA	0	0	0	1	3	4	3	0	0
SOD	0	0	0	0	0	0	12	0	0
POD	0	0	0	1	0	6	5	0	0
CAT	6	0	1	1	1	2	0	1	0

材料Material	D值 D value	排序 Ranking	抗旱性等级 Drought-resistance grade
135	0.8058	1	强High
16	0.4654	6	中Moderate
费乌瑞它Feiwuruita	0.3566	9	中Moderate
SOLARA	0.7307	2	强High
TACNA	0.6241	4	强High
克新23号Kexin23	0.7281	3	强High
SOSNA	0.1219	12	差Low
冀张14号Jizhang14	0.1735	11	差Low
F8	0.5229	5	中Moderate
P	0.4327	7	中Moderate
VITESSE	0.3122	10	中Moderate
ZORA	0.3946	8	中Moderate