【目的】在豆科与禾本科牧草混播草地中不仅存在种内竞争也存在种间竞争,由于不同植物之间竞争力强弱不同,竞争的结果将出现一方逐渐消退,另一方逐渐占据优势的现象,因此研究豆科与禾本科牧草之间竞争与共存机制对于维持混播草地稳定高...【目的】在豆科与禾本科牧草混播草地中不仅存在种内竞争也存在种间竞争,由于不同植物之间竞争力强弱不同,竞争的结果将出现一方逐渐消退,另一方逐渐占据优势的现象,因此研究豆科与禾本科牧草之间竞争与共存机制对于维持混播草地稳定高产具有重要意义。【方法】在温室栽培条件下设置3个氮肥水平(0,75,150kg N·hm-2,记作N0,N75,N150)以及单播和混播两种种植模式(无芒雀麦单播,紫花苜蓿单播,无芒雀麦和紫花苜蓿1﹕1混播),采用相对生物量(RY)、相对密度(RD)、竞争率(CR)和相对产量总值(RYT)以及紫花苜蓿的固氮比例(%Ndfa)和转氮比例(%N Trans)等指标研究无芒雀麦和紫花苜蓿在1﹕1混播中的竞争关系与共存机制。【结果】施氮量从0增加到150 kg N·hm-2,单播中无芒雀麦的地上和地下生物量和分蘖数显著增加(P<0.05),而紫花苜蓿的地上和地下生物量和分枝数无显著变化(P>0.05)。在混播中无芒雀麦的地上和地下生物量和分蘖数也显著增加(P<0.05),在一定程度上抑制了紫花苜蓿的生物量和分枝数。另外,在混播中无芒雀麦以增加分蘖数的方式来扩张地上空间的能力要强于紫花苜蓿。无芒雀麦的单株生物量和分蘖数在混播模式下都极显著高于单播(P<0.01),而紫花苜蓿的单株生物量和分枝数在混播模式下极显著低于单播(P<0.01)。在混播中无芒雀麦的竞争率始终大于1.0,而紫花苜蓿的竞争率始终小于1.0,这说明无芒雀麦的竞争力要大于紫花苜蓿的竞争力,且在整个生育期中,无芒雀麦的竞争力逐渐减弱,而紫花苜蓿的竞争力逐渐增强。在N0处理下,第2次、第3次和第4次取样时,无芒雀麦和紫花苜蓿的相对产量总值(RYT)显著大于1.0(P<0.05),说明无芒雀麦和紫花苜蓿无明显的竞争效应,这主要归功于紫花苜蓿的生物固氮对无芒雀麦的贡献(地上部转移的氮素占无芒雀麦氮素含量的15.26展开更多
The plants of two elfalfa （Medicago sativa L.） cultivars differing in salt tolerance were subjected to three salt treatments, 70, 140, and 210 mM NaCl for 7 days. Root, shoot, and leaf growths were inhibited by incr...The plants of two elfalfa （Medicago sativa L.） cultivars differing in salt tolerance were subjected to three salt treatments, 70, 140, and 210 mM NaCl for 7 days. Root, shoot, and leaf growths were inhibited by increased salt treatments in both cultivars, and at 140 and 210 mM salt treatments, Zhongmu 1 had significantly higher root, shoot, and leaf dry weights per plant than Deft. The malondialdehyde （MDA） accumulation in Deft was considerably greater than in Zhongmu 1, indicating a higher degree of lipid peroxidation at 140 and 210 mM salt treatments. The changes in the activity and active isoforms of antioxidant enzymes such as superoxide dismutase （SOD, EC 1.15.1.1）, catalase （CAT, EC 1.11.1.6）, peroxidase （POD, EC 1.11.1.7）, and ascorbate peroxidase （APOX, EC 1.11,1.11）, accumulation of free proline, and rate of lipid peroxidation in leaves of two alfalfa cultivars were also investigated. After stress, the activity and active isoforms of antioxidative enzymes were altered and the extent of alteration varied between the cultivar Deft and Zhongmu 1. The proline accumulation in Deft was considerably greater than in Zhongmu 1 at 210 mM salt treatment. This indicated that proline accumulation may be the result, instead of the cause, of salt tolerance.展开更多
文摘【目的】在豆科与禾本科牧草混播草地中不仅存在种内竞争也存在种间竞争,由于不同植物之间竞争力强弱不同,竞争的结果将出现一方逐渐消退,另一方逐渐占据优势的现象,因此研究豆科与禾本科牧草之间竞争与共存机制对于维持混播草地稳定高产具有重要意义。【方法】在温室栽培条件下设置3个氮肥水平(0,75,150kg N·hm-2,记作N0,N75,N150)以及单播和混播两种种植模式(无芒雀麦单播,紫花苜蓿单播,无芒雀麦和紫花苜蓿1﹕1混播),采用相对生物量(RY)、相对密度(RD)、竞争率(CR)和相对产量总值(RYT)以及紫花苜蓿的固氮比例(%Ndfa)和转氮比例(%N Trans)等指标研究无芒雀麦和紫花苜蓿在1﹕1混播中的竞争关系与共存机制。【结果】施氮量从0增加到150 kg N·hm-2,单播中无芒雀麦的地上和地下生物量和分蘖数显著增加(P<0.05),而紫花苜蓿的地上和地下生物量和分枝数无显著变化(P>0.05)。在混播中无芒雀麦的地上和地下生物量和分蘖数也显著增加(P<0.05),在一定程度上抑制了紫花苜蓿的生物量和分枝数。另外,在混播中无芒雀麦以增加分蘖数的方式来扩张地上空间的能力要强于紫花苜蓿。无芒雀麦的单株生物量和分蘖数在混播模式下都极显著高于单播(P<0.01),而紫花苜蓿的单株生物量和分枝数在混播模式下极显著低于单播(P<0.01)。在混播中无芒雀麦的竞争率始终大于1.0,而紫花苜蓿的竞争率始终小于1.0,这说明无芒雀麦的竞争力要大于紫花苜蓿的竞争力,且在整个生育期中,无芒雀麦的竞争力逐渐减弱,而紫花苜蓿的竞争力逐渐增强。在N0处理下,第2次、第3次和第4次取样时,无芒雀麦和紫花苜蓿的相对产量总值(RYT)显著大于1.0(P<0.05),说明无芒雀麦和紫花苜蓿无明显的竞争效应,这主要归功于紫花苜蓿的生物固氮对无芒雀麦的贡献(地上部转移的氮素占无芒雀麦氮素含量的15.26
基金supported financially by the Educational Committee of Beijing and Construction Project of Key Lab and Subject of Beijing,China (XK100190552,JD100190537)
文摘The plants of two elfalfa （Medicago sativa L.） cultivars differing in salt tolerance were subjected to three salt treatments, 70, 140, and 210 mM NaCl for 7 days. Root, shoot, and leaf growths were inhibited by increased salt treatments in both cultivars, and at 140 and 210 mM salt treatments, Zhongmu 1 had significantly higher root, shoot, and leaf dry weights per plant than Deft. The malondialdehyde （MDA） accumulation in Deft was considerably greater than in Zhongmu 1, indicating a higher degree of lipid peroxidation at 140 and 210 mM salt treatments. The changes in the activity and active isoforms of antioxidant enzymes such as superoxide dismutase （SOD, EC 1.15.1.1）, catalase （CAT, EC 1.11.1.6）, peroxidase （POD, EC 1.11.1.7）, and ascorbate peroxidase （APOX, EC 1.11,1.11）, accumulation of free proline, and rate of lipid peroxidation in leaves of two alfalfa cultivars were also investigated. After stress, the activity and active isoforms of antioxidative enzymes were altered and the extent of alteration varied between the cultivar Deft and Zhongmu 1. The proline accumulation in Deft was considerably greater than in Zhongmu 1 at 210 mM salt treatment. This indicated that proline accumulation may be the result, instead of the cause, of salt tolerance.
