不同分类系统下油松幼苗根系特征的差异与联系

doi:10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.12.004

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

植物根序和径级不仅反映细根的形态结构, 而且能反映根系的一些生理特征, 如细根寿命和周转等。该文以二年生油松(Pinus tabulaeformis)幼苗根系为研究对象, 系统比较了根序分类方法和径级分类方法在描述根系特征上的优缺点, 探索了两者之间的内在联系。结果表明: 二年生油松幼苗最多可包括6级根序, 直径的变化范围为0.169-3.877 mm。按根序划分, I-VI级根序的总根长和总根表面积主要集中在前3级根序, 这3级根序的根占总根长的78.77%和总根表面积的62.72%。前3级根序的比根长是后3级根序比根长的1.3-3.0倍, 比根面积是后3级比根面积的1.0-1.5倍。按常用的径级(以0.5、1.0、1.5和2.0 mm为阈值)划分方法, 油松幼苗大部分根系直径≤1.5 mm, 此区间细根的根长和根表面积占总根长的93.76%和总根表面积的84.35%。直径≤1.5 mm的细根平均比根长是>1.5 mm细根比根长的3-7倍, 比根面积的1.5-3.0倍。由于油松根序和径级之间有显著的指数关系, 依据径级最大程度反映根序的原则, 提出了新的径级划分方法, 即以0.4、0.8、1.3和2.0 mm为阈值对油松幼苗根系径级重新进行划分。此时, 上述区间可分别包括I级、II级、III级、IV级、V级根序中根尖数的93.22%、86.37%、75.96%、70.47%和76.67%。同时也可分别涵盖各径级根长的89.34%-70.83%、根面积的86.01%-76.12%以及体积的87.73%-76.12%。此时, 根系不同径级与根序之间可以建立起良好的对应关系。这些结果表明, 通过合理划分径级区间可以较好地反映根序特征。

关键词: 油松, 根系特征, 根系径级, 根系生态学, 根序

Abstract:

Aims Our objectives were to: 1) compare the advantages and disadvantages of the root order and diameter classes in the description of root morphology characteristics and 2) explore the inherent connection between them.
Methods We excavated 2-year-old Pinus tabulaeformis seedling roots in Zhouzhi County, Shaanxi Province, China. Individual roots were dissected according to the branching order, starting from the distal end of the root system that was numbered as the first order and then increasing sequentially with each branch from the first order roots to higher order ones. Following dissection, fine root samples were scanned by the Win-RHIZO system to analyze root length, specific root length, specific root surface area, diameter and tips. Fine root samples were then oven-dried at 65 °C to a constant weight to determine weight.
Important findings Six root orders were included, with diameters that ranged from 0.169 to 3.877 mm. The summed length and surface area of the first three orders accounted for 78.77% and 62.72% of the totals, respectively. The specific root length and specific root area of the first three orders are 1.3-3.0 times and 1.0-1.5 times that of as the other orders. Based on diameter classes of ≤0.5, 0.5-1.0, 1.0-1.5 and 1.5-2.0 mm, most root diameters of P. tabulaeformis seedling were <1.5 mm. The summed length and surface area of this diameter range accounted for 93.76% and 84.35% of the totals, respectively. The specific root length and specific root area of roots <1.5 mm in diameter were 3.0-7.0 times and 1.5-3.0 times as large as roots >1.5 mm. For the exponential relationship between root orders and diameters and based on diameters’ maximum ratio reflecting root orders, a new diameter classification was proposed: ≤0.4, 0.4-0.8, 0.8-1.3 and 1.3-2.0 mm. As a result, the above intervals might represent the I, II, III, IV and V root orders in number of root tip of 93.22%, 86.37%, 75.96%, 70.47% and 76.67%, root length of 89.34%-70.83%, root area of 86.01%-76.12% and root volume of 87.73%-76.12%. Therefore, we identified a relationship between root diameter classification and root order, and it is possible to reflect root orders through logical division of the root diameter classes.

Key words: Pinus tabulaeformis, root characteristic, root diameter classification, root ecology, root order

刘莹, 王国梁, 刘国彬, 曲秋玲, 袁子成. 不同分类系统下油松幼苗根系特征的差异与联系. 植物生态学报, 2010, 34(12): 1386-1393. DOI: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.12.004

LIU Ying, WANG Guo-Liang, LIU Guo-Bin, QU Qiu-Ling, YUAN Zi-Cheng. Difference and inherent linkage of root characteristics in different root classification of Pinus tabulaeformis seedlings. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2010, 34(12): 1386-1393. DOI: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.12.004

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.12.004

https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/Y2010/V34/I12/1386

图/表 6

参考文献 19

[1]	Burton AJ, Pregitzer KS, Hendrick RL (2000). Relationships between fine root dynamics and nitrogen availability in Michigan northern hardwood forests. Oecologia, 125, 389-399. DOI URL PMID
[2]	Chang WJ (常文静), Guo DL (郭大立) (2008). Variation in root diameter among 45 common tree species in temperate, subtropical and tropical forests in China. Journal of Plant Ecology (Chinese Version) (植物生态学报), 32, 1248-1257. ( in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	Cheng YH (程云环), Han YZ (韩有志), Wang QC (王庆成), Wang ZQ (王政权) (2005). Seasonal dynamics of fine root biomass, root length density, specific root length and soil resource availability in a Larix gmelini plantation. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 29, 403-410. ( in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	Eissenstat DM (1991). On the relationship between specific root length and the rate of root proliferation: a field study using citrus rootstocks. New Phytologist, 118, 63-68. DOI URL
[5]	Eissenstat DM, Yanni RD (2002). Root lifespan, efficiency and turnover. In: Waisel Y, Eshel A, Kafkafi U eds. Plant Roots: the Hidden Half 3rd edn. Dekker, New York. 221-238.
[6]	Fitter AH (1996). Characteristics and functions of root systems. In: Waisel Y, Eshel E, Kafkafi U eds. Plant Roots: the Hidden Half 2nd edn. Dekker, New York. 1-20.
[7]	Gill RA, Jackson RB (2002). Global patterns of root turnover for terrestrial ecosystems. New Phytologist, 147, 13-31.
[8]	Guo DL, Li H, Mitchell RJ, Han WX, Hendricks JJ, Fahey TJ, Hendrick RL (2008). Heterogeneity by root branch order: exploring the discrepancy in root longevity and turnover estimates between minirhizotron and C isotope methods. New Phytologist, 177, 443-456.
[9]	Guo DL, Mitchell RJ, Hendricks JJ (2004). Fine root branch orders respond differentially to carbon source-sink manipulations in a longleaf pine forest. Oecologia, 140, 450-457. DOI URL PMID
[10]	Mei L (梅莉), Wang ZQ (王政权), Han YZ (韩有志), Gu JC (谷加存), Wang XR (王向荣), Cheng YH (程云环), Zhang XJ (张秀娟) (2006). Distribution patterns of Fraxinus mandshurica root biomass, specific root length and root length density. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 17, 1-4. (in Chinese with English abstract) URL PMID
[11]	Mei L (梅莉), Wang ZQ (王政权), Zhang XJ (张秀娟), Yu LZ (于立忠), Du Y (杜英) (2008). Effects of nitrogen fertilization on fine root biomass production and turnover of Fraxinus mandshurica plantation. Chinese Journal of Ecology (生态学杂志), 27, 1663-1668. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	Pregitzer KS, Deforest JL, Burton AJ, Allen MF, Ruess RW, Hendrick RL (2002). Fine root architecture of nine north American trees. Ecologcial Monographs, 72, 293-309.
[13]	Pregitzer KS, Kubiske ME, Yu CK, Hendrick RL (1997). Relationships among root branch order, carbon, and nitrogen in four temperate species. Oecologia, 111, 302-308. DOI URL PMID
[14]	Thomas SM, Whitehead D, Adams JA (1996). Seasonal root distribution and soil surface carbon fluxes for one year old Pinus radiate trees growing at ambient and elevated carbon dioxide concentration. Tree Physiology, 16, 1015-1021. DOI URL PMID
[15]	Wang GL (王国梁), Zhou D (周东) (2009). Fine root characteristic changes of pioneer community with plant succession in abandoned croplands in the Loess Gully Region, China. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica (西北植物学报), 29, 0356-0364. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	Wang XR (王向荣), Wang ZQ (王政权), Han YZ (韩有志), Gu JC (谷加存), Guo DL (郭大立), Mei L (梅莉) (2005). Variations of fine root diameter with root order in Manchurian ash and Dahurian larch plantations. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 29, 871-877. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	Wells CE, Glenn DM, Eissenstat DM (2002). Changes in the risk of fine-root mortality with age: a case study in peach, Prunus persica(Rosaceae). American Journal of Botany, 89, 79-87.
[18]	Wen DZ (温达志), Wei P (魏平), Kong GH (孔国辉), Ye WH (叶万辉) (1999). Production and turnover rate of fine roots in two lower subtropical forest sites at Dinghushan. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 23, 361-369. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	Yu LZ (于立忠), Ding GQ (丁国泉), Shi JW (史建伟), Yu SQ (于水强), Zhu JJ (朱教君), Zhao LF (赵连富) (2007). Effects of fertilization on fine root diameter, root length and specific root length in Larix kaempferi plantation. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 18, 957-962. (in Chinese with English abstract) URL PMID

根序 Root order	平均根长 Mean root length (cm)	总根长 Total root length (cm)	平均直径 Mean diameter (mm)	平均表面积 Mean surface area (cm²)	总表面积 Total surface area (cm²)	平均体积 Mean volume (cm³)	比根长 Specific root length (m·g^-1)	比根面积 Specific root area (m²·g^-1)
I	0.225 (0.005)^e	72.928 (12.838)^a	0.371 (0.001)^f	0.026 (0.006)^e	10.526 (1.722)^bc	0.000 2 (0.000)^e	14.244 (1.731)^b	0.021 (0.002)^c
II	0.935 (0.023)^d	91.106 (8.473)^a	0.553 (0.003)^e	0.176 (0.005)^e	17.712 (1.554)^b	0.003 0 (0.000)^e	19.800 (0.551)^a	0.039 (0.002)^a
III	3.478 (0.134)^c	90.628 (12.227)^a	0.931 (0.008)^d	1.048 (0.043)^d	27.672 (3.693)^a	0.026 0 (0.001)^d	8.850 (0.401)^c	0.026 (0.001)^b
IV	4.302 (0.260)^b	47.105 (5.604)^b	1.204 (0.018)^c	1.605 (0.100)^c	17.842 (2.126)^b	0.049 0 (0.003)^c	4.558 (0.474)^d	0.016 (0.002)^d
V	4.777 (0.434)^b	13.244 (1.706)^c	1.446 (0.039)^b	2.183 (0.206)^b	7.525 (0.934)^c	0.083 0 (0.009)^b	1.314 (0.169)^e	0.007 (0.001)^e
VI	7.355 (0.536)^a	8.260 (0.834)^c	3.108 (0.134)^a	7.116 (0.525)^a	7.836 (0.658)^c	0.578 0 (0.051)^a	0.330 (0.026)^e	0.003 (0.000)^e

根序 Root order	平均根长 Mean root length (cm)	总根长 Total root length (cm)	平均直径 Mean diameter (mm)	平均表面积 Mean surface area (cm²)	总表面积 Total surface area (cm²)	平均体积 Mean volume (cm³)	比根长 Specific root length (m·g^-1)	比根面积 Specific root area (m²·g^-1)
I	0.225 (0.005)^e	72.928 (12.838)^a	0.371 (0.001)^f	0.026 (0.006)^e	10.526 (1.722)^bc	0.000 2 (0.000)^e	14.244 (1.731)^b	0.021 (0.002)^c
II	0.935 (0.023)^d	91.106 (8.473)^a	0.553 (0.003)^e	0.176 (0.005)^e	17.712 (1.554)^b	0.003 0 (0.000)^e	19.800 (0.551)^a	0.039 (0.002)^a
III	3.478 (0.134)^c	90.628 (12.227)^a	0.931 (0.008)^d	1.048 (0.043)^d	27.672 (3.693)^a	0.026 0 (0.001)^d	8.850 (0.401)^c	0.026 (0.001)^b
IV	4.302 (0.260)^b	47.105 (5.604)^b	1.204 (0.018)^c	1.605 (0.100)^c	17.842 (2.126)^b	0.049 0 (0.003)^c	4.558 (0.474)^d	0.016 (0.002)^d
V	4.777 (0.434)^b	13.244 (1.706)^c	1.446 (0.039)^b	2.183 (0.206)^b	7.525 (0.934)^c	0.083 0 (0.009)^b	1.314 (0.169)^e	0.007 (0.001)^e
VI	7.355 (0.536)^a	8.260 (0.834)^c	3.108 (0.134)^a	7.116 (0.525)^a	7.836 (0.658)^c	0.578 0 (0.051)^a	0.330 (0.026)^e	0.003 (0.000)^e

径级 Diameter class (mm)	平均根长 Mean root length (cm)	总根长 Total root length (cm)	平均表面积 Mean surface area (cm²)	总表面积 Total surface area (cm²)	平均体积 Mean volume (cm³)	比根长 Specific root length (m·g^-1)	比根面积 Specific root area (m²·g^-1)
D1 ≤ 0.5	0.466 (0.016)^e	86.885 (13.355)^b	0.030 (0.001)^d	12.852 (1.793)^b	0.000 3 (0.000)^d	12.645 (0.097)^a	0.019 (0.002)^b
0.5 < D2 ≤ 1.0	1.242 (0.043)^d	132.269 (13.088)^a	0.290 (0.011)^d	31.609 (3.073)^a	0.005 0 (0.000)^d	13.198 (0.514)^a	0.032 (0.001)^a
1.0 < D3 ≤ 1.5	2.522 (0.166)^c	83.940 (8.336)^b	0.868 (0.045)^c	30.715 (3.136)^a	0.024 0 (0.001)^c	5.069 (0.493)^b	0.018 (0.002)^b
1.5 < D4 ≤ 2.0	3.842 (0.339)^b	11.917 (1.424)^c	1.758 (0.151)^b	6.101 (0.774)^c	0.066 0 (0.006)^b	1.564 (0.328)^c	0.009 (0.002)^c
D5 > 2.0	7.355 (0.536)^a	8.260 (0.834)^c	7.116 (0.525)^a	7.836 (0.658)^bc	0.578 0 (0.051)^a	0.330 (0.026)^c	0.003 (0.000)^d

径级 Diameter class (mm)	平均根长 Mean root length (cm)	总根长 Total root length (cm)	平均表面积 Mean surface area (cm²)	总表面积 Total surface area (cm²)	平均体积 Mean volume (cm³)	比根长 Specific root length (m·g^-1)	比根面积 Specific root area (m²·g^-1)
D1 ≤ 0.5	0.466 (0.016)^e	86.885 (13.355)^b	0.030 (0.001)^d	12.852 (1.793)^b	0.000 3 (0.000)^d	12.645 (0.097)^a	0.019 (0.002)^b
0.5 < D2 ≤ 1.0	1.242 (0.043)^d	132.269 (13.088)^a	0.290 (0.011)^d	31.609 (3.073)^a	0.005 0 (0.000)^d	13.198 (0.514)^a	0.032 (0.001)^a
1.0 < D3 ≤ 1.5	2.522 (0.166)^c	83.940 (8.336)^b	0.868 (0.045)^c	30.715 (3.136)^a	0.024 0 (0.001)^c	5.069 (0.493)^b	0.018 (0.002)^b
1.5 < D4 ≤ 2.0	3.842 (0.339)^b	11.917 (1.424)^c	1.758 (0.151)^b	6.101 (0.774)^c	0.066 0 (0.006)^b	1.564 (0.328)^c	0.009 (0.002)^c
D5 > 2.0	7.355 (0.536)^a	8.260 (0.834)^c	7.116 (0.525)^a	7.836 (0.658)^bc	0.578 0 (0.051)^a	0.330 (0.026)^c	0.003 (0.000)^d

百分比例 Percentage	根序 Root order
百分比例 Percentage	I	II	III	IV	V	VI
100%	0.17-0.59	0.20-1.35	0.42-1.43	0.67-1.92	0.99-1.84	≥2.00
95%	0.33-0.44	0.33-0.92	0.59-1.29	0.82-1.70	1.00-1.80	≥2.00
90%	0.33-0.41	0.34-0.83	0.65-1.19	0.90-1.66	1.06-1.79	≥2.00
85%	0.34-0.41	0.37-0.76	0.68-1.16	0.95-1.59	1.07-1.74	≥2.00
80%	0.34-0.40	0.41-0.73	0.71-1.14	0.98-1.52	1.19-1.73	≥2.00