AM真菌对干旱胁迫下文冠果根系形态和叶片结构耦合的影响

doi:10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2024-0759

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的探究干旱胁迫下接种丛枝菌根（arbuscular mycorrhizal，AM）真菌对文冠果（Xanthoceras sorbifolium Bunge）根系形态、叶片解剖结构及生理的影响，并明确灌水阈值。方法以摩西斗管囊霉（Funneliformis mosseae）为供试菌种，选用1年生文冠果幼苗进行盆栽试验，设置4种干旱胁迫（正常（WW）、轻度（LD）、中度（MD）、重度（SD）），进行接种（AM）与不接种（NM），共计8个处理，并对测定指标进行相关性、主成分分析。结果 AM真菌对文冠果有较好的侵染效益，能够增强根系活力，增加根系体积及最长侧根长，促使地上部生物量的积累高于地下部。随干旱程度加剧，叶片解剖结构完整性在轻度干旱（LD）胁迫后遭受破坏，但接菌苗受损程度较小。此外，AM真菌促进下表皮和栅栏组织厚度的增加并达到极显著水平（P<0.001），SD胁迫时，AM组仍高于NM各处理组。另一方面，相同胁迫下，接种AM真菌能够增强叶片超氧化物歧化酶（SOD）、过氧化物酶（POD）和过氧化氢酶（CAT）活性，降低丙二醛（MDA）含量，从而减缓干旱对文冠果造成的质膜伤害。相关性分析表明，文冠果生物量与根系各指标均存在显著影响；叶片厚度、上表皮厚度与根系活力呈显著正相关（P<0.05）；而叶的海绵组织厚度与根系活力、根系体积均呈极显著正相关（P<0.001）。通过主成分分析发现，MD处理是文冠果自身抗旱能力的临界点，同时文冠果菌根苗在LD干旱环境适应性最佳。结论 AM真菌通过增强根系活力、增加根系体积、提高叶片栅栏组织厚度和叶片厚度等机制以应对干旱亏缺，并启动叶片抗氧化系统与根系性状之间的协同策略适应干旱环境。

关键词: 干旱胁迫, AM真菌, 文冠果, 根叶耦合, 生理机制

Abstract:

Objective The study intends to investigate the effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi on the root morphology, leaf physiology, and anatomical structure of Xanthoceras sorbifolium Bunge under drought stress, and to clarify the irrigation threshold. Method Funneliformes mosseae was used as the test strain, and one-year-old X. sorbifolium Bunge seedlings were selected for pot experiments. Four types of drought stress (well water supply (WW), light drought (LD), moderate drought (MD), and serious drought (SD)) were set up, with a total of eight treatments. All data were evaluated by conducting correlation and principal component analysis. Result AM fungi had a positive infection effect on X. sorbifolium Bunge, which enhanced root vitality, root volume, and the longest lateral root length, increased the accumulation of aboveground biomass higher than that of underground biomass. As the drought intensity intensified, the integrity of leaf anatomical structure was damaged after LD stress, but the damage to AM fungi-inoculated seedlings was less. Notably, mycorrhizal colonization markedly improved the accumulation of aboveground biomass than that of underground aboveground biomass. Moreover, AM fungi symbiosis led to a highly significant increase in the thickness of lower epidermis and palisade tissue (P<0.001), and the AM group were still high in comparison with the NM group under SD stress. In addition,the mycorrhization process led to a strong increase of the activities of superoxide dismutase (SOD), peroxidase (POD), and catalase (CAT) in comparison with NM plants under the same stress. Unlike, MDA content, and membrane damage reduced by AM symbiosis. Correlation analysis showed that the biomass of X. sorbifolium Bunge had a significant impact on various indicators of the root system. Furthermore, there was a significant positive correlation (P<0.05) between leaf thickness, upper epidermal thickness, and root vitality. On the other hand, the thickness of leaf sponge tissue was significantly positively correlated with root vitality and volume quantity (P<0.001). Principal component analysis showed that MD treatment was the critical point for the drought resistance of X. sorbifolium Bunge itself, and X. sorbifolium Bunge bacterial root seedlings had the best adaptability in LD drought environment. Conclusion AM fungi can contribute to better growth performance exposure to drought stress by enhancing root vitality, root volume, as well as improving the thickness of leaf palisade group, and leaf thickness. In general, X. sorbifolium Bunge can adapt to drought through activating antioxidant system of leaves, root traits, and synergistic strategies between root traits and leaves.

Key words: drought stress, AM fungi, Xanthoceras sorbifolium Bunge, root leaf coupling, physiological mechanism

宗建伟, 邓海芳, 蔡沅原, 常雅雯, 朱雅琦, 杨雨华. AM真菌对干旱胁迫下文冠果根系形态和叶片结构耦合的影响[J]. 生物技术通报, 2025, 41(6): 167-178.

ZONG Jian-wei, DENG Hai-fang, CAI Yuan-yuan, CHANG Ya-wen, ZHU Ya-qi, YANG Yu-hua. Coupling Effect of AM Fungi on the Root Morphology and Leaf Structure of Xanthoceras sorbifolium Bunge under Drought Stress[J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2025, 41(6): 167-178.

图/表 12

参考文献 37

1	陈俊芳, 吴宪, 杨佳绒,等. 全球气候变化下干旱及复水对植物和土壤微生物的影响: 进展与展望[J]. 生态学杂志, 2023, 42(12): 3038-3049.
	Chen JF, Wu X, Yang JR, et al. Effects of drought and rewatering on plants and soil microorganisms under climate change:review and perspectives [J]. Chi J Ecol, 2023, 42(12): 3038-3049.
2	徐梦琦, 高艳菊, 张志浩, 等. 干旱胁迫对疏叶骆驼刺幼苗生长和生理的影响 [J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(2): 257-267.
	Xu MQ, Gao YJ, Zhang ZH, et al. Effects of drought stress on growth and physiology of Alhagi sparsifolia seedlings [J]. Arid Zone Res, 2023, 40(2): 257-267.
3	陈兰兰, 王丽, 吴亚娟, 等. 植物响应干旱胁迫的分子和微生态机制 [J/OL]. 分子植物育种, 2023: 1-15. .
	Chen LL, Wang L, Wu YJ, et al. Molecular and microecological mechanisms of plant responses to drought stress [J/OL]. Mol Plant Breeding, 2023: 1-15. .
4	冯树林. 干旱胁迫和复水对侧柏和紫穗槐幼苗生长和生理特征的影响研究 [D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2020.
	Feng SL. Effects of drought stress and rehydration on growth and physiological characteristics of Platycladus orientalis and Amorpha fruticosa seedlings [D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2020.
5	Eviner VT, Chapin FS. Functional matrix: a conceptual framework for predicting multiple plant effects on ecosystem processes [J]. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst, 2003, 34: 455-485.
6	Li WR, Wang LW, Qian SF, et al. Root characteristics explain greater water use efficiency and drought tolerance in invasive Compositae plants [J]. Plant Soil, 2023, 483(1): 209-223.
7	程鑫, 吴纯泽, 韦庆钰, 等. 水曲柳丛枝菌根真菌接菌苗对干旱胁迫的生长和生理响应 [J]. 林业科学, 2023, 59(2): 58-66.
	Cheng X, Wu CZ, Wei QY, et al. Growth and physiological responses of Fraxinus mandshurica seedlings inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi to drought stress [J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2023, 59(2): 58-66.
8	毛沂新. 生物质能源树种文冠果发展可行性探析 [J]. 防护林科技, 2017(9): 119-120.
	Mao YX. Feasibility analysis on the development of Xanthoceras sorbifolia Bunge as a biomass energy tree species [J]. Prot For Sci Technol, 2017(9): 119-120.
9	李沅楷. 文冠果育苗移栽与盐胁迫、节水抗旱措施对苗木生长的影响 [D]. 阿拉尔: 塔里木大学, 2023.
	Li YK. Effects of transplanting Xanthoceras sorbifolia seedlings, salt stress, water saving and drought resistance measures on seedling growth [D]. Ala'er: Tarim University, 2023.
10	赖小平. 干旱胁迫对文冠果根系发育及幼苗生长的影响研究 [J]. 绿色科技, 2023, 25(3): 95-98.
	Lai XP. Effects of drought stress on root system development and seedling growth of Xanthoceras sorbifolia [J]. J Green Sci Technol, 2023, 25(3): 95-98.
11	王孟珂, 田梦妮, 毕泉鑫, 等. 基于气孔性状的文冠果种质资源抗旱性评价及抗旱资源筛选 [J]. 植物研究, 2021, 41(6): 957-964.
	Wang MK, Tian MN, Bi QX, et al. Evaluation of drought tolerance based on stomatal characters and selection of germplasm resources from Xanthoceras sorbifolia [J]. Bull Bot Res, 2021, 41(6): 957-964.
12	陈菲. 盐碱胁迫对文冠果幼苗生理生化特征的影响 [D]. 大连: 大连工业大学, 2017.
	Chen F. Effects of saline-alkali stress on physiological and biochemical characteristics of Xanthoceras sorbifolia seedlings [D]. Dalian: Dalian Polytechnic University, 2017.
13	Janah I, Meddich A, Elhasnaoui A, et al. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi mitigates salt stress toxicity in Stevia rebaudiana bertoni through the modulation of physiological and biochemical responses [J]. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr, 2023, 23(1): 152-162.
14	Giovannetti M, Mosse B. An evaluation of techniques for measuring vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal infection in roots [J]. New Phytol, 1980, 84(3): 489-500.
15	何凤, 刘攀峰, 王璐, 等. 干旱胁迫及复水对杜仲苗生理特性的影响 [J]. 植物生理学报, 2021, 57(3): 661-671.
	He F, Liu PF, Wang L, et al. Effect of drought stress and rewatering on physiological characteristics of Eucommia ulmoides seedling [J]. Plant Physiol J, 2021, 57(3): 661-671.
16	韩忠明, 王云贺, 胥苗苗, 等. 干旱胁迫对防风生理特性及品质的影响 [J]. 西北农林科技大学学报: 自然科学版, 2017, 45(11): 100-106.
	Han ZM, Wang YH, Xu MM, et al. Effect of drought stress on physiological characteristics and quality of Saposhnikovia divaricata [J]. J Northwest A F Univ Nat Sci Ed, 2017, 45(11): 100-106.
17	Van Rossum MWPC, Alberda M, van der Plas LHW. Role of oxidative damage in tulip bulb scale micropropagation [J]. Plant Sci, 1997, 130(2): 207-216.
18	Nakano Y, Asada K. Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate-specific peroxidase in spinach chloroplasts [J]. Plant Cell Physiol, 1981, 22(5): 867-880.
19	Ahmad S, Pritsos C A, Bowen S M, Heisler, et al. Antioxidant enzymes of larvae of the cabbage looper moth, trichoplusia ni: subcellular distribution and activities of superoxide dismutase, catalase and glutathione reductase [J]. Free Radic Res Commun, 1988, 4(6), 403-408.
20	张亚敏, 马克明, 曲来叶. 干旱条件下接种AM真菌对小马鞍羊蹄甲幼苗根系的影响 [J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(8): 2611-2619.
	Zhang YM, Ma KM, Qu LY. Inoculation with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi enhances the root system of Bauhinia faberi var. Microphylla seedlings under drought stress conditions [J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2017, 37(8): 2611-2619.
21	黄小辉, 陈道静, 冯大兰. 不同基质条件下丛枝菌根真菌对桑树生长的影响 [J]. 南京林业大学学报: 自然科学版, 2019, 43(3): 9-16.
	Huang XH, Chen DJ, Feng DL. The effects of arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi on the growth of mulberry in different nursery substrates [J]. J Nanjing For Univ Nat Sci Ed, 2019, 43(3): 9-16.
22	陈奕璇, 谢坤豪, 王晓芹, 等. 丛枝菌根真菌对大葱幼苗生长和矿质元素吸收的影响 [J]. 中国蔬菜, 2024(8): 80-86.
	Chen YX, Xie KH, Wang XQ, et al. The effects of inoculated arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on the growth and mineral element uptake of green onion seedlings [J]. China Veg, 2024(8): 80-86.
23	蒲子天, 张林, 张弛, 等. 丛枝菌根真菌与植物共生影响植物水分状态的研究进展 [J]. 土壤, 2022, 54(5): 882-889.
	Pu ZT, Zhang L, Zhang C, et al. Research progress of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and plant symbiosis affecting plant water regime [J]. Soils, 2022, 54(5): 882-889.
24	冯晓敏, 高翔, 吕慧卿, 等. 抗旱糜子根系生长特性及叶片表皮结构对水分胁迫的响应 [J]. 作物杂志, 2024(4): 172-179.
	Feng XM, Gao X, Lü HQ, et al. The responses of root growth characteristics and leaf epidermal structure of drought-resistant broomcorn millet to water stress [J]. Crops, 2024(4): 172-179.
25	何建社, 张利, 刘千里, 等. 岷江干旱河谷区典型灌木对干旱胁迫的生理生化响应 [J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(7): 2362-2371.
	He JS, Zhang L, Liu QL, et al. Physiological and biochemical response of typical shrubs to drought stress in the Minjiang River dry valley [J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2018, 38(7): 2362-2371.
26	许亚男. 接种AMF对干旱胁迫燕麦光合特性及解剖结构的影响 [D]. 太谷: 山西农业大学, 2022.
	Xu YN. Effects of AMF inoculation on photosynthetic characteristics and anatomical structure of oat under drought stress [D]. Taigu: Shanxi Agricultural University, 2022.
27	李芳兰, 包维楷. 植物叶片形态解剖结构对环境变化的响应与适应 [J]. 植物学通报, 2005, (S1): 118-127.
	Li FL, Bao WK. Responses of the morphological and anatomical structure of the plant leaf to environmental change [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2005, (S1): 118-127.
28	刘明, 张晴, 白惠茹, 等. 干旱胁迫对栽培种及野生种北沙参叶片解剖结构及生理特性的影响 [J]. 烟台大学学报: 自然科学与工程版, 2023, 36(1): 28-33.
	Liu M, Zhang Q, Bai HR, et al. Effects of drought stress on anatomical structure and physiological characteristics of leaves of cultivated and wild Glehnia littoralis [J]. J Yantai Univ Nat Sci Eng Ed, 2023, 36(1): 28-33.
29	李源, 王赞, 刘贵波, 等. 干旱胁迫下胶质苜蓿内源激素及解剖结构的研究 [J]. 华北农学报, 2010, 25(6): 211-216.
	Li Y, Wang Z, Liu GB, et al. Study on endogenesis hormones and anatomical structures of Medicago glutinosa under drought stress [J]. Acta Agric Boreali Sin, 2010, 25(6): 211-216.
30	宗建伟, 黄小迪, 靳永安, 等. NaCl胁迫下摩西斗管囊霉对文冠果生长及叶片解剖结构和叶绿素荧光参数的影响 [J]. 植物资源与环境学报, 2023, 32(2): 73-81.
	Zong JW, Huang XD, Jin YA, et al. Effect of Funneliformis mosseae on growth and leaf anatomical structure and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters of Xanthoceras sorbifolium under NaCl stress [J]. J Plant Resour Environ, 2023, 32(2): 73-81.
31	Mahmood T, Khalid S, Abdullah M, et al. Insights into drought stress signaling in plants and the molecular genetic basis of cotton drought tolerance [J]. Cells, 2019, 9(1): 105.
32	Liu XY, Chen Z, Jahan MS, et al. RNA-Seq analysis reveals the growth and photosynthetic responses of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) under red and blue LEDs with supplemental yellow, green, or white light [J]. Hortic Res, 2020, 7(1): 206.
33	谭炯锐, 查同刚, 张泽宇, 等. 猪毛菜响应干旱胁迫的叶片结构、生理及转录组分析 [J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(1): 75-88.
	Tan JR, Zha TG, Zhang ZY, et al. Leaf structure, physiology and transcriptome analysis of Salsola collina in response to drought stress [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sin, 2024, 33(1): 75-88.
34	颜巧芳, 单立山, 解婷婷, 等. 珍珠柴幼苗叶片和根系形态特征对干旱胁迫的响应 [J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(1): 92-103.
	Yan QF, Shan LS, Xie TT, et al. Morphological characteristics of the leaves and roots of Caroxylon passerinum seedlings in response to drought-induced stress [J]. Arid Zone Res, 2024, 41(1): 92-103.
35	邹原东, 高琼, 毕红艳, 等. 不同丛枝菌根真菌对甘草生长和保护酶活性的影响 [J]. 北方园艺, 2017(12): 162-166.
	Zou YD, Gao Q, Bi HY, et al. Effects of different arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on growth and protective enzyme activity of Glycyrrhiza uralensis [J]. North Hortic, 2017(12): 162-166.
36	Benhiba L, Fouad MO, Essahibi A, et al. Arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis enhanced growth and antioxidant metabolism in date palm subjected to long-term drought [J]. Trees, 2015, 29(6): 1725-1733.
37	罗艳菊, 谢林艳, 邹清林, 等. 内生菌对干旱胁迫下甘蔗的生理响应及抗旱性评价 [J]. 生物技术通报, 2023, 39(12): 219-228.
	Luo YJ, Xie LY, Zou QL, et al. Physiological response and drought resistance evaluation of endophytic bacteria to sugarcane under drought stress [J]. Biotechnol Bull, 2023, 39(12): 219-228.

处理 Treatment	田间持水量 Field water-holding capacity （%）
WW	75-80
LD	60-65
MD	45-50
SD	30-35

处理 Treatment	田间持水量 Field water-holding capacity （%）
WW	75-80
LD	60-65
MD	45-50
SD	30-35

处理 Treatment	地上部分鲜质量 Aboveground fresh weight （g）	地上部分干质量 Aboveground dry weight （g）	地下部分鲜质量 Underground fresh weight （g）	地下部分干质量 Underground dry weight （g）	根冠比 Root-shoot ratio
WW+NM	43.10±0.48b	37.95±0.86b	20.57±0.91b	17.98±2.07a	0.47±0.04cd
LD+NM	40.14±0.89c	28.09±1.02d	20.69±1.01b	16.18±0.36b	0.58±0.03b
MD+NM	20.40±1.56e	14.65±1.48f	11.29±0.58c	9.88±0.50c	0.68±0.07a
SD+NM	15.51±0.53f	13.32±0.99f	8.02±0.75d	7.60±0.72d	0.57±0.02b
WW+AM	45.46±0.05a	43.52±0.48a	23.69±1.29a	18.09±0.22ab	0.42±0.01d
LD+AM	42.56±0.28b	34.22±3.21c	21.10±1.08b	17.58±0.31a	0.52±0.04bc
MD+AM	22.86±0.93d	19.87±0.75e	11.86±0.52c	11.37±0.82c	0.57±0.03b
SD+AM	18.86±1.92e	15.71±0.62f	11.11±0.89c	8.37±0.27d	0.53±0.00bc
干旱 Drought	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001
接种 Inoculation	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.05	P<0.001
干旱×接种 Drought×Inoculation	0.89	0.15	P<0.05	0.505	0.432

处理 Treatment	地上部分鲜质量 Aboveground fresh weight （g）	地上部分干质量 Aboveground dry weight （g）	地下部分鲜质量 Underground fresh weight （g）	地下部分干质量 Underground dry weight （g）	根冠比 Root-shoot ratio
WW+NM	43.10±0.48b	37.95±0.86b	20.57±0.91b	17.98±2.07a	0.47±0.04cd
LD+NM	40.14±0.89c	28.09±1.02d	20.69±1.01b	16.18±0.36b	0.58±0.03b
MD+NM	20.40±1.56e	14.65±1.48f	11.29±0.58c	9.88±0.50c	0.68±0.07a
SD+NM	15.51±0.53f	13.32±0.99f	8.02±0.75d	7.60±0.72d	0.57±0.02b
WW+AM	45.46±0.05a	43.52±0.48a	23.69±1.29a	18.09±0.22ab	0.42±0.01d
LD+AM	42.56±0.28b	34.22±3.21c	21.10±1.08b	17.58±0.31a	0.52±0.04bc
MD+AM	22.86±0.93d	19.87±0.75e	11.86±0.52c	11.37±0.82c	0.57±0.03b
SD+AM	18.86±1.92e	15.71±0.62f	11.11±0.89c	8.37±0.27d	0.53±0.00bc
干旱 Drought	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001
接种 Inoculation	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.05	P<0.001
干旱×接种 Drought×Inoculation	0.89	0.15	P<0.05	0.505	0.432

处理 Treatment	根系活力 Root activity （μTTF /g/h）	根系体积 Root volume （cm³）	一级新根数 Number of new roots	最长侧根长 Roots length （cm）
WW+NM	70.40±2.27b	64.02±0.42c	101.33±0.58c	14.26±0.25b
LD+NM	63.90±1.26c	60.87±0.52d	91.33±1.53d	13.31±0.32c
MD+NM	42.16±1.10e	57.04±0.87f	81.67±0.58e	12.21±0.15d
SD+NM	32.61±1.46f	52.97±0.97g	70.33±1.53f	10.34±0.54e
WW+AM	78.50±0.57a	70.28±1.05a	122.67±2.52a	15.45±0.14a
LD+AM	73.41±2.27b	65.88±0.65b	106.00±1.00b	14.53±0.50b
MD+AM	51.04±2.30d	60.82±0.45d	92.67±0.58d	13.52±0.47c
SD+AM	49.61±4.09d	58.48±0.87e	80.33±1.53e	11.77±0.48d
干旱 Drought	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001
接种 Inoculation	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001	P<0.001
干旱×接种 Drought×Inoculation	P<0.01	2.81	P<0.001	0.12