植物生态学报 ›› 2013, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (2): 173-182.DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00018
李晓娟1,2, 王强2,*(), 倪穗1,*(
), 阮晓2, 王永红2, 张焕2, 王高峰3
收稿日期:
2012-11-26
接受日期:
2012-12-29
出版日期:
2013-11-26
发布日期:
2013-01-31
通讯作者:
王强,倪穗
作者简介:
E-mail: nisui@nbu.edu.cn)基金资助:
LI Xiao-Juan1,2, WANG Qiang2,*(), NI Sui1,*(
), RUAN Xiao2, WANG Yong-Hong2, ZHANG Huan2, Geoff WANG3
Received:
2012-11-26
Accepted:
2012-12-29
Online:
2013-11-26
Published:
2013-01-31
Contact:
WANG Qiang,NI Sui
摘要:
以种子发芽率和发芽势为种子萌发参数, 以胚根、胚芽长度和鲜重变化为幼苗生长参数, 研究了栗(Castanea mollissima)叶水提取物对双子叶植物莴苣(Lactuca sativa)、萝卜(Raphanus sativus)、黄瓜(Cucumis sativus), 和单子叶植物洋葱(Allium cepa)、水稻(Oryza sativa)、小麦(Triticum aestivum)的化感作用; 比较了美国板栗(Castanea dentata)与栗叶水提取物及经X-5大孔树脂分离获得的11个洗脱组分间的化感作用强弱; 利用液相色谱-质谱联用技术结合标准物质的反证实验, 解析了美国板栗与栗化感作用最强分离组分的物质结构。研究结果表明, 栗叶化感效应强于美国板栗; 美国板栗与栗化感作用最强分离组分中(5:5洗脱组分)存在绿原酸、对羟基苯甲酸、原儿茶酸和没食子酸等物质。在利用栗基因恢复美国板栗种群时, 有必要考虑美国板栗与栗植物化学生态特性的差异。
李晓娟, 王强, 倪穗, 阮晓, 王永红, 张焕, 王高峰. 栗与美国板栗化感作用的比较. 植物生态学报, 2013, 37(2): 173-182. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00018
LI Xiao-Juan, WANG Qiang, NI Sui, RUAN Xiao, WANG Yong-Hong, ZHANG Huan, Geoff WANG. Allelopathy comparison between Castanea mollissima and C. dentata. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2013, 37(2): 173-182. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00018
图1 栗叶水提取物对测试植物种子萌发的影响(平均值±标准偏差, n = 3)。I, 莴苣。II, 萝卜。III, 黄瓜。IV, 洋葱。V, 水稻。VI, 小麦。按照最小显著差数法多重比较, 标记不同字母的均值间存在显著差异(p = 0.05)。
Fig. 1 Effect of water extract of Castanea molissima leaf on germination of test plants (mean ± SD, n = 3). I, Lactuca sativa. II, Raphanus sativus. III, Cucumis sativus. IV, Allium cepa. V, Oryza sativa. VI, Triticum aestivum. Means marked with different letters are significantly different according to least significant difference multiple comparisons (p = 0.05).
图2 栗叶水提取物对测试植物胚根、胚芽生长的影响(平均值±标准偏差, n = 3)。I, 莴苣。II, 萝卜。III, 黄瓜。IV, 洋葱。V, 水稻。VI, 小麦。按照最小显著差数法多重比较, 标记不同字母的均值间存在显著差异(p = 0.05)。
Fig. 2 Effect of water extract of Castanea molissima leaf on radicle and plumule length of test plants (mean ± SD, n = 3). I, Lactuca sativa. II, Raphanus sativus. III, Cucumis sativus. IV, Allium cepa. V, Oryza sativa. VI, Triticum aestivum. Means marked with different letters are significantly different according to least significant difference multiple comparisons ( p = 0.05).
图3 栗叶水提取物对测试植物鲜重的影响(平均值±标准偏差, n = 3)。A, 莴苣。B, 萝卜。C, 黄瓜。D, 洋葱。E, 水稻。F, 小麦。按照最小显著差数法多重比较, 标记不同字母的均值间存在显著差异(p = 0.05)。
Fig. 3 Effect of water extract of Castanea molissima leaf on the fresh weight of test plants (mean ± SD, n = 3). A, Lactuca sativa. B, Raphanus sativus. C, Cucumis sativus. D, Allium cepa. E, Oryza sativa. F, Triticum aestivum. Means marked with different letters are significantly different according to least significant difference multiple comparisons (p = 0.05).
组分中水:乙醇 Ratio of water to ethanol in component | 干重 Dry weight (g) | |
---|---|---|
美国板栗 Castanea dentata | 栗 Castanea molissima | |
10:0 | 3.355 ± 0.121 | 3.331 ± 0.152 |
9:1 | 1.145 ± 0.056 | 0.334 ± 0.020 |
8:2 | 0.873 ± 0.022 | 0.780 ± 0.028 |
7:3 | 0.813 ± 0.030 | 0.925 ± 0.030* |
6:4 | 0.364 ± 0.012 | 0.422 ± 0.024* |
5:5 | 0.101 ± 0.005 | 0.109 ± 0.008 |
4:6 | 0.043 ± 0.009 | 0.090 ± 0.012 |
3:7 | 0.056 ± 0.018 | 0.137 ± 0.040 |
2:8 | 0.051 ± 0.012 | 0.051 ± 0.033 |
1:9 | 0.054 ± 0.028 | 0.060 ± 0.045 |
0:10 | 0.043 ± 0.022 | 0.081 ± 0.055 |
总重量 Total weight | 6.025 ± 0.059A | 6.021 ± 0.034a |
总上样量 Total sample weight | 6.089 ± 0.062A | 6.052 ± 0.042a |
表1 美国板栗与栗分离组分的定量分析(平均值±标准偏差, n = 3)
Table 1 Quantitative analysis of isolated components of Castanea dentata and C. molissima (mean ± SD, n = 3)
组分中水:乙醇 Ratio of water to ethanol in component | 干重 Dry weight (g) | |
---|---|---|
美国板栗 Castanea dentata | 栗 Castanea molissima | |
10:0 | 3.355 ± 0.121 | 3.331 ± 0.152 |
9:1 | 1.145 ± 0.056 | 0.334 ± 0.020 |
8:2 | 0.873 ± 0.022 | 0.780 ± 0.028 |
7:3 | 0.813 ± 0.030 | 0.925 ± 0.030* |
6:4 | 0.364 ± 0.012 | 0.422 ± 0.024* |
5:5 | 0.101 ± 0.005 | 0.109 ± 0.008 |
4:6 | 0.043 ± 0.009 | 0.090 ± 0.012 |
3:7 | 0.056 ± 0.018 | 0.137 ± 0.040 |
2:8 | 0.051 ± 0.012 | 0.051 ± 0.033 |
1:9 | 0.054 ± 0.028 | 0.060 ± 0.045 |
0:10 | 0.043 ± 0.022 | 0.081 ± 0.055 |
总重量 Total weight | 6.025 ± 0.059A | 6.021 ± 0.034a |
总上样量 Total sample weight | 6.089 ± 0.062A | 6.052 ± 0.042a |
图4 美国板栗与栗分离组分对莴苣种子萌发的影响(平均值±标准偏差, n = 3)。A, 发芽势。B, 发芽率。按照最小显著差数法多重比较, 标记不同字母的均值间存在显著差异(p = 0.05)。
Fig. 4 Effect of isolated components of Castanea dentata and C. molissima on seed germination of lettuce (mean ± SD, n = 3). A, Germination vigor. B, Germination rate. Means marked with different letters are significantly different according to least significant difference multiple comparisons (p = 0.05)
图5 美国板栗与栗分离组分对莴苣幼苗生长的影响(平均值±标准偏差, n = 3)。A, 胚根。B, 胚芽。C, 鲜重。按照最小显著差数法多重比较, 标记不同字母的均值间存在显著差异(p = 0.05)。
Fig. 5 Effect of isolated components of Castanea dentata and C. molissima on lettuce seedlings (mean ± SD, n = 3). A, Radicle. B, Plumule. C, Fresh weight. Means marked with different letters are significantly different according to least significant difference multiple comparisons (p = 0.05)
[1] | Anderson PJ (1914). The morphology and life history of the chestnut blight fungus. Cornell University, Harrisburg. 44. |
[2] | Anderson TW (1974). The chestnut pollen decline as a time horizon in lake sediments in eastern North America. Canadian Journal of Earth Science, 11, 678-685. |
[3] | Baldwin T (2003). Finally, proof of weapons of mass destruction. Science Signaling, 203, 42. |
[4] | Barakat A, Staton M, Cheng CH, Park J, Yassin NBM, Ficklin S, Yeh CC, Hebard F, Baier K, Powell W, Schuster SC, Wheeler N, Abbott A, Carlson JE, Sederoff R (2012). Chestnut resistance to the blight disease: insights from transcriptome analysis. BioMed Central Plant Biology, 12, 38. |
[5] | Barreira JC, Casal S, Ferreira IC, Oliveira MB, Pereira JA (2009). Nutritional, fatty acid and triacylglycerol profiles of Castanea sativa Mill. cultivars: a compositional and chemometric approach. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 57, 2836-2842. |
[6] | Beattie RK, Diller JD (1954). Fifty years of chestnut blight in America. Journal of Forestry, 52, 323-329. |
[7] | Bennett AJ, Bending GD, Chandler D, Hilton S, Mills P (2012). Meeting the demand for crop production: the challenge of yield decline in crops grown in short rotations. Biological Reviews, 87, 52-71. |
[8] | Blanco JA (2007). The representation of allelopathy in ecosystem-level forest models. Ecological Modelling, 209, 65-77. |
[9] | Bounous G (2005). The chestnut: a multipurpose resource for the new millennium. Acta Horticulturae, 693, 33-138. |
[10] | Callaway RM, Ridenour WM (2004). Novel weapons: invasive success and the evolution of increased competitive ability. The Ecological Society of America, 2, 436-443. |
[11] | Chou CH, Leu LL (1992). Allelopathic substances and interactions of Delonix regia (Boj) Raf. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 18, 2285-2303. |
[12] | de Albuquerque MB, Dos Santos RC, Lima LM, Melo PD, Nogueira RJMC, da Cämara CAG, de Rezende Ramos AD (2011). Allelopathy, an alternative tool to improve cropping systems. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 31, 379-395. |
[13] | Delcourt PA, Delcourt HR (1998). The influence of prehistoric human set fires on oak-chestnut forests in the southern Appalachians. Castanea, 63, 337-345. |
[14] | Djurdjević L, Mitrović M, Gajić G, Jarić S, Kostić O, Oberan L, Pavlović P (2011). An allelopathic investigation of the domination of the introduced invasive Conyza canadensis L. Flora, 206, 921-927. |
[15] | Elliott KJ, Swank WT (2008). Long-term changes in forest composition and diversity following early logging (1919-1923) and the decline of American chestnut (Castanea dentata). Plant Ecology, 197, 155-172. |
[16] | Exum EM (1992). Tree in a coma. American Forests, 98, 20-25, 59. |
[17] | Farooq M, Jabran K, Cheema ZA, Wahid A, Siddique KHM (2011). The role of allelopathy in agricultural pest management. Pest Management Science, 67, 493-506. |
[18] | Foster DR, Clayden S, Orwig DA, Hall B, Barry S (2002). Oak, chestnut and fire: climatic and cultural controls of long-term forest dynamics in New England, USA. Journal of Biogeography, 29, 1359-1379. |
[19] | Freinkel S (2007). American Chestnut: the Life, Death, and Rebirth of a Perfect Tree. University of California Press, Los Angeles. 75. |
[20] | Gounga ME, Xu SY, Wang Z, Yang WG (2008). Effect of whey protein isolate-pullulan edible coatings on the quality and shelf life of freshly roasted and freeze-dried Chinese chestnut. Food Engineering and Physical Properties, 73, 155-161. |
[21] | Hebard FV (2006). The backcross breeding program of the American chestnut foundation. Journal of the American Chestnut Foundation, 19, 55-78. |
[22] | Husaain F, Ilahi I, Malik SA, Dasti AA, Ahmad B (2011). Allelopathic effects of rain leachates and root exudates of Cenchrus ciliaris L. and Bothriochloa pertusa (L.) A. camus. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 43, 341-350. |
[23] | Leather GR, Einhelling FA (1986). Bioassays in the study of allelopathy. In: Putnam AR, Tang CS eds. The Science of Allelopathy. John Wiley, Sons, New York. 133-145. |
[24] |
Li ZH, Wang Q, Ruan X, Pan CD, Jiang DA (2010). Phenolics and plant allelopathy. Molecules, 15, 8933-8952.
DOI URL |
[25] | Lord W (2005). Wildlife food: the pre-blight chestnut and the post-blight acorn. Journal of the American Chestnut Foundation, 6, 29-32. |
[26] |
Lutts RH (2004). Manna from god: the American chestnut trade in southwestern Virginia. Environmental History, 9, 497-525.
DOI URL |
[27] |
McCormick JF, Platt RB (1980). Recovery of an Appalachian forest following the chestnut blight or catherine keever― you were right! American Midland Naturalist, 104, 264-273.
DOI URL |
[28] | Mitrović M, Jarić S, Djurdjević L, Karadzić B, Gajić G, Kostić O, Oberan LJ, Pavlović D, Pavlović M, Pavlović P (2012). Allelopathic and environmental implications of plant phenolic compounds. Allelopathy Journal, 29, 177-197. |
[29] |
Nowacka J, O1eszek W (1994). Determination of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) saponins by high-performance liquid chromatography. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 42, 727-730.
DOI URL |
[30] | Pan CD, Wang Q, Ruan X, Li ZH (2009). Biological activity and quantification of potential auto-toxins from the leaves of Picea schrenkiana. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 33, 186-196. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 潘存德, 王强, 阮晓, 李兆慧 (2009). 天山云杉针叶水提取物自毒效应及自毒物质的分离鉴定. 植物生态学报, 33, 186-196.] | |
[31] |
Pellissier F, Souto XC (1999). Allelopathy in northern temperate and boreal semi-natural woodland. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 18, 637-652.
DOI URL |
[32] | Pereira-Lorenzo S, Ramos-Cabrer AM (2004). Chestnut, an ancient crop with future. Production Practices and Quality Assessment of Food Crops, 1, 105-161. |
[33] |
Seal AN, Pratley JE, Haig T, An M (2004). Identification and quantitation of compounds in a series of allelopathic and non-allelopathic rice root exudates. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 30, 1647-1662.
DOI URL |
[34] |
Sodaeizadeh H, Rafieiolhossaini M, Havlík J, van Damme P (2009). Allelopathic activity of different plant parts of Peganum harmala L. and identification of their growth inhibitors substances. Plant Growth Regulation, 59, 227-236.
DOI URL |
[35] |
Vandermast DB, van Lear DH, Clinton BD (2002). American chestnut as an allelopath in the southern Appalachians. Forest Ecology and Management, 165, 173-181.
DOI URL |
[36] | Zeng RS (1999). Review on bioassay methods for allelopathy research. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 10, 123-126. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 曾任森 (1999). 化感作用研究中的生物测定方法综述. 应用生态学报, 10, 123-126.] | |
[37] |
Zhang JH, Mao ZQ, Wang LQ, Shu HR (2007). Bioassay and identification of root exudates of three fruit tree species. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology, 49, 257-261.
DOI URL |
[38] |
Zhang M, Chen HX, Zhang Y (2011). Physicochemical, thermal, and pasting properties of Chinese chestnut (Castanea mollissima Bl.) starches as affected by different drying methods. Starch, 63, 260-267.
DOI URL |
[1] | 李文博 孙龙 娄虎 于澄 韩宇 胡同欣. 火干扰对兴安落叶松种子萌发的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2024, 48(预发表): 0-0. |
[2] | 袁涵 钟爱文 刘送平 徐磊 彭焱松. 水毛花种子萌发特性的差异及休眠解除方法[J]. 植物生态学报, 2024, 48(5): 638-650. |
[3] | 李绍阳, 马红媛, 赵丹丹, 马梦谣, 亓雯雯. 火烧信号对种子萌发影响的研究进展[J]. 植物生态学报, 2021, 45(11): 1177-1190. |
[4] | 艾沙江•阿不都沙拉木, 迪丽娜尔•阿布拉, 张凯, 买热也木古•吐尔逊, 卡迪尔•阿布都热西提, 李玲. 喀什霸王的结实和种子萌发特性[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(5): 437-446. |
[5] | 吴小琪, 杨圣贺, 黄力, 李笑寒, 杨超, 钱深华, 杨永川. 常绿阔叶林林冠环境对栲幼苗建成的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(1): 55-64. |
[6] | 刘波, 吕宪国, 姜明, 张文广, 武海涛. 光照、水深交互作用对松嫩湿地芦苇种子萌发的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2015, 39(6): 616-620. |
[7] | 陈志颖, 阮晓, 张玉竹, 潘存德, 王强. 3,4-二羟基苯乙酮胁迫对天山云杉种子萌发过程中内源植物激素含量变化的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2013, 37(12): 1114-1122. |
[8] | 刘会良, 张永宽, 张道远, 尹林克, 张元明. 不同居群准噶尔无叶豆果实和种子特性及种子萌发差异[J]. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(8): 802-811. |
[9] | 王桔红, 马瑞君, 陈文. 冷层积和室温干燥贮藏对河西走廊8种荒漠植物种子萌发的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(8): 791-801. |
[10] | 张敏, 朱教君, 闫巧玲. 光对种子萌发的影响机理研究进展[J]. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(8): 899-908. |
[11] | 胡小文, 王娟, 王彦荣. 野豌豆属4种植物种子萌发的积温模型分析[J]. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(8): 841-848. |
[12] | 杨帆, 曹德昌, 杨学军, 高瑞如, 黄振英. 盐生植物角果碱蓬种子二型性对环境的适应策略[J]. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(8): 781-790. |
[13] | 李霄峰, 胥晓, 王碧霞, 黄尤优, 王志峰, 李俊钰. 小五台山森林落叶层对天然青杨种群更新方式的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(2): 109-116. |
[14] | 刘文, 刘坤, 张春辉, 杜国祯. 种子萌发的积温效应——以青藏高原东缘的12种 菊科植物为例[J]. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35(7): 751-758. |
[15] | 申建红, 曾波, 类淑桐, 苏晓磊, 黄文军. 三峡水库消落区4种一年生植物种子的水淹耐受性及水淹对其种子萌发的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35(3): 237-246. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||
Copyright © 2022 版权所有 《植物生态学报》编辑部
地址: 北京香山南辛村20号, 邮编: 100093
Tel.: 010-62836134, 62836138; Fax: 010-82599431; E-mail: apes@ibcas.ac.cn, cjpe@ibcas.ac.cn
备案号: 京ICP备16067583号-19