不同类型盐碱胁迫对棉花种子萌发的影响

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.08.002

新疆农业科学 ›› 2024, Vol. 61 ›› Issue (8): 1831-1844.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.08.002

• 作物遗传育种·种质资源·分子遗传学·耕作栽培·生理生化 • 上一篇下一篇

不同类型盐碱胁迫对棉花种子萌发的影响

董志多¹^,²(), 徐菲¹^,³, 付秋萍², 黄建¹, 祁通¹(), 孟阿静¹, 付彦博¹^,³, 开赛尔·库尔班³

1.新疆农业科学院土壤肥料与农业节水研究所/农业农村部盐碱土改良与利用(干旱半干旱区盐碱地)重点实验室,乌鲁木齐 830091
2.新疆农业大学水利与土木工程学院,乌鲁木齐 830052
3.新疆农业科学院拜城农业试验站/国家土壤质量阿克苏观测试验站,新疆阿克苏 843000

收稿日期:2024-02-01 出版日期:2024-08-20 发布日期:2024-09-19
通信作者: 祁通(1982-),男,新疆人,研究员,研究方向为盐碱土改良与利用,(E-mail)tong1982nn@163.com
作者简介:董志多(1997-),女,新疆塔城人,硕士研究生,研究方向为盐碱土改良与利用,(E-mail)dzd1281228561@163.com
基金资助:
新疆维吾尔自治区重大专项(2022A02007-1)

Effects of different types of salt and alkali stress on cotton seed germination

DONG Zhiduo¹^,²(), XU Fei¹^,³, FU Qiuping², HUANG Jian¹, QI Tong¹(), MENG Ajing¹, FU Yanbo¹^,³, Kaisaier Kuerban³

1. Key Laboratory of Saline-alkali Soil Improvement and Utilization (Saline-Alkali Land in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions), Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, P. R. China,Urumqi 830091, China
2. College of Water Conservancy and Civil Engineering, Xinjiang Agricultural University, Urumqi 830052, China
3. Baicheng Agricultural Experimental Station of Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences / National Soil Quality Aksu Observation Experimental Station, Aksu Xinjiang 843000, China

Received:2024-02-01 Published:2024-08-20 Online:2024-09-19
Correspondence author: QI Tong(1982-),male,from Xinjiang research fellow,research direction:improvement and utilization of saline-alkali soil, (E-mail)tong1982nn@163.com
Supported by:
The Major Scientific R & D Program Project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region(2022A02007-1)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】研究不同类型盐碱胁迫对棉花种子萌发的影响并计算耐盐阈值。【方法】采用培养皿法,模拟设置4种类型盐碱胁迫和7个浓度处理,以新陆中84号、塔河2号、新陆中40号和酒棉18号棉花种子为研究对象,分析盐碱胁迫下棉花种子的发芽势、发芽率、发芽指数、种子活力指数、萌发后幼苗鲜重和干重变化,计算耐盐阈值和隶属函数值,并综合评价。【结果】 (1)在4种盐碱胁迫下,棉花种子的发芽势、发芽率、发芽指数、活力指数、萌发后幼苗的鲜重和干重均呈显著下降趋势。盐碱浓度与各项指标均呈极显著负相关,其中与发芽率的相关性超过-0.90。(2)在4种盐碱胁迫条件下棉花萌发期的耐盐阈值存在差异,S₁胁迫下耐盐阈值为90.70~121.73 mmol/L;S₂胁迫下耐盐阈值为82.68~128.30 mmol/L;S3胁迫下耐盐阈值为51.97~84.62 mmol/L。S₄胁迫下耐盐阈值为73.49~98.21 mmol/L。(3)棉花种子耐盐性由强至弱的顺序在S₁胁迫下为新陆中84号>新陆中40号>塔河2号>酒棉18号,在S₂胁迫下为新陆中84号>塔河2号>新陆中40号>酒棉18号,在S₃胁迫下为塔河2号>新陆中40号>新陆中84号>酒棉18号,S₄胁迫下各品种棉花种子耐盐强弱顺序与S₂胁迫一致。【结论】4种盐碱胁迫下均降低了棉花种子的发芽势、发芽率、发芽指数和活力指数,随着浓度升高,幼苗的鲜重和干重均呈下降趋势。碱性盐对棉花种子萌发影响明显大于中性盐。

关键词: 棉花; 盐胁迫; 种子萌发; 耐盐性; 发芽率

Abstract:

【Objective】 This study aims to investigate the influence and threshold of different types of saline-alkali stress on the germination of cotton seeds. 【Methods】 Four types of saline-alkali stress and seven concentration levels were simulated by Petri dish method. Cotton seeds of Xinluzhong 84, Tahe 2, Xinluzhong 40 and Jiumian 18 were used as research objects. The germination potential, germination rate, germination index, seed vigor index, fresh weight and dry weight of seedlings after germination were analyzed, salt tolerance threshold and membership function values were calculated, and comprehensive evaluation was carried out. 【Results】 (1) The germination potential, germination rate, germination index, vitality index, fresh weight and dry weight of cotton seed after germination showed a significant downward trend under the four types of saline-alkali stress. There was a significant negative correlation between saline-alkali concentration and all indexes, and the correlation between saline-alkali concentration and germination rate was more than -0.90. (2) The salt tolerance thresholds of cotton at germination stage were different under the four types of saline-alkali stress conditions. The salt tolerance thresholds under S₁ stress ranged from 90.70 to 121.73 mmol/L. The salt tolerance threshold under S₂ stress ranged from 82.68 to 128.30 mmol/L. The salt tolerance threshold under S₃ stress ranged from 51.97 to 84.62 mmol/L. The salt tolerance threshold under S₄ stress ranged from 73.49 to 98.21 mmol/L. (3) The salt tolerance of cotton seeds under four kinds of saline-alkali stress was analyzed by membership function and its order was Xinluzhong 84 > Xinluzhong 40 > Tahe 2 > Jiumian 18 under S₁ stress, Xinluzhong 84 > Tahe 2 > Xinluzhong 40 > Jiumian 18 under S₂ stress, and Tahe 2 > Xinluzhong 40 > Xinluzhong 84 > Jiumian 18 under S₃ stress. It was found that the order of salt tolerance of cotton seeds under S₄ stress was consistent with that under S₂ stress. 【Conclusion】 The germination potential, germination rate, germination index and vigor index of cotton seeds are decreased under the four types of saline-alkali stress, and the fresh and dry weight of seedlings shows a downward trend with the increase of the concentration. The effect of alkaline salt on the germination of cotton seed is obviously greater than that of neutral salt.

Key words: cotton; salt stress; seed germination; salt tolerance; germination rate

中图分类号:

S562

董志多, 徐菲, 付秋萍, 黄建, 祁通, 孟阿静, 付彦博, 开赛尔·库尔班. 不同类型盐碱胁迫对棉花种子萌发的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1831-1844.

DONG Zhiduo, XU Fei, FU Qiuping, HUANG Jian, QI Tong, MENG Ajing, FU Yanbo, Kaisaier Kuerban. Effects of different types of salt and alkali stress on cotton seed germination[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(8): 1831-1844.

图/表 13

参考文献 33

[1]	卫雨西, 陈丽娟, 冯起, 等. 干旱区盐碱土微生物特征及其影响因素研究进展[J]. 中国沙漠, 2024, (3): 1-13.
	WEI Yuxi, CHEN Lijuan, FENG Qi, et al. Progress on microbial characteristics in arid salt-affected soils and related factors[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, (3): 1-13.
[2]	徐婷, 柳延涛, 王海江, 等. 盐碱胁迫对花生种子发芽特性影响及盐害综合鉴定评价[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2022, 44(5): 1037-1047. DOI
	XU Ting, LlU Yantao, WANG Haijiang, et al. Effects of saline-alkali stress on germination characteristies of peanut seeds and comprehensive identification and evaluation of salt damage[J]. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2022, 44(5): 1037-1047. DOI
[3]	张龙. 近二十年新疆灌区盐碱地变化情况分析和对策研究[J]. 水资源开发与管理, 2020, (6): 72-76.
	ZHANG Long. Analysis and countermeasure research on saline-alkali land change in Xinjiang irrigation area in recent 20 years[J]. Water Resources Development and Management, 2020, (6): 72-76.
[4]	孙文君, 江晓慧, 付媛媛, 等. 盐分胁迫对棉花幼苗叶片叶绿素荧光参数的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2021, 40(7): 23-28,121.
	SUN Wenjun, JIANG Xiaohui, FU Yuanyuan, et al. The effects of salt stress on chlorophyll fluorescence of cotton seedling leaves[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2021, 40(7): 23-28,121.
[5]	邵晶晶, 李鹏程, 郑苍松, 等. 盐胁迫对干播湿出棉花出苗率和苗期生长发育的影响[J]. 棉花学报, 2023, 35(4): 288-301. DOI
	SHAO Jingjing, LI Pengcheng, ZHENG Cangsong, et al. Effects of salt stress on emergence rate and development of cotton seedlings under dry-sowing and wet-emergence planting mode[J]. Cotton Science, 2023, 35(4): 288-301.
[6]	冯泉清, 高阳, 李云峰, 等. 水盐胁迫对南疆棉花生长发育及产量品质的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2022, 41(10): 73-81.
	FENG Quanging, GAO Yang, LI Yunfeng, et al. The effects of water and salt stresses on growth, yield and quality of cotton in southern Xinjiang[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2022, 41(10): 73-81.
[7]	王萌, 刘文君, 鲁雪莉, 等. 大豆种质资源萌发期耐盐性评价和耐盐机理解析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2023, 39(26): 8-16. DOI
	WANG Meng, LIU Wenjun, LU Xueli, et al. Soybean germplasm resources at germination: salt tolerance evaluation and mechanism analysis[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(26): 8-16. DOI
[8]	李梦娣, 冯国军, 杨晓旭, 等. 耐盐胁迫菜豆品种筛选及其苗期耐性生理研究[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2022, (4): 51-61.
	LI Mengdi, FENG Guojun, YANG Xiaoxu, et al. Screening of salt tolerant common bean varieties and studies on their salt tolerance physiology in seedling stage[J]. China Vegetables, 2022, (4): 51-61.
[9]	MA Yingying, Wei Zhenghua, LIU Jie, et al. Growth and physiological responses of cotton plants to salt stress[J]. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 2021, 207: 565-576. DOI
[10]	Muhammad Owais Khan, Muhammad Irfan, Asim Muhammad, et al. A practical and economical strategy to mitigate salinity stress through seed priming[J]. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 2022, 10: 1-14.
[11]	段文静, 孟妍君, 江丹, 等. 外源褪黑素对盐胁迫下棉花幼苗形态及抗氧化系统的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2022, 30(1): 92-104.
	DUAN Wenjing, MENG Yanjun, JIANG Dan, et al. Effects of exogenous melatonin on the morphology and antioxidant enzyme activities of cotton seedlings under salt stress[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculure, 2022, 30(1): 92-104.
[12]	Yang Yan, XIE Jianming, LI Jing, et al. Trehalose alleviates salt tolerance by improving photosynthetic performance and maintaining mineral ion homeostasis in tomato plants[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2022, 13: 974507.
[13]	白灯莎·买买提艾力, 张少民, 孙良斌, 等. 新疆不同年代27个棉花品种(系)种子萌发阶段耐盐能力比较[J]. 西北农业学报, 2012, 21(1): 72-79.
	Baidengsha·Maimaitiaili, ZHANG Shaomin, SUN Liangbin, et al. Comparisons of salt resistances during germination stage among 27 cotton varieties (line) grown in Xinjiang[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica, 2012, 21(1): 72-79.
[14]	杨淑萍, 危常州, 梁永超. 新疆主要棉花品种耐盐性筛选与鉴定[J]. 干旱区研究, 2013, 30(6): 1129-1135.
	YANG Shuping, WEI Changzhou, LIANG Yongchao. Identification and screening of salt tolerance of main cotton varieties in Xinjiang[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2013, 30(6): 1129-1135.
[15]	李寒暝, 白灯莎·买买提艾力, 张少民, 等. 新疆棉花品种的耐盐性综合评价[J]. 核农学报, 2010, 24(1): 160-165. DOI
	LI Hanming, Baidengsha·Maimaitiaili, ZHANG Shaomin, et al. Evaluation of seven cotton(Gossypium hirsutum L) varieties in Xinjiang[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2010, 24(1): 160-165. DOI
[16]	赵康, 杨涛, 王红刚, 等. 42个新疆海岛棉品种萌发期耐盐性评价[J]. 作物杂志, 2022, (5): 27-33.
	ZHAO Kang, YANG Tao, WANG Honggang, et al. Evaluation on salt tolerance of 42 sea-island cotton(Gossypium barbadense) varieties in Xinjiang during germination period[J]. Crops, 2022, (5): 27-33.
[17]	李双男, 郭慧娟, 王晶, 等. 不同盐碱胁迫对棉花种子萌发的影响[J]. 种子, 2018, 37(1): 38-45.
	LI Shuangnan, GUO Huijuan, WANG Jing, et al. Effects of different saline and alkaline stress on seed[J]. Seeds, 2018, 37(1): 38-45.
[18]	孙文君. 低温和盐碱胁迫下棉花幼苗对外源褪黑素的生理响应[D]. 阿拉尔: 塔里木大学, 2021.
	SUN Wenjun. Physiological response of cotton seedlings to exogenous melatonin under low temperature and salt-alkali stress[D]. Alar: Tarim University, 2021.
[19]	苏莹, 郭安慧, 华金平. 棉花耐盐性鉴定方法探讨[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2021, 26(12): 11-19.
	SU Ying, GUO Anhui, HUA Jinping. Strategies for evaluation the salt tolerance in cotton[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2021, 26(12): 11-19.
[20]	贾秀峰. 苏打盐碱胁迫对两种苜蓿种子萌发影响及品种耐性综合分析[J]. 草地学报, 2019, 27(6): 1511-1517. DOI
	JIA Xiufeng. Effect of soda salt-alkaline stress on seed germination and salt tolerance evaluation analysis of two Medicago sativa varieties[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2019, 27(6): 1511-1517. DOI
[21]	陈雅琦. 醉马草内生真菌共生体种子耐盐碱性与施氮对种子产量的影响[D]. 兰州: 兰州大学, 2022.
	CHEN Yaqi. The saline-alkali tolerance of seed of Epichloě endophytie fungi-Achnatherum inebrians symbiont and effects of nitrogen application on seed yield[D]. Lanzhou: LanzhouUniversity, 2022.
[22]	梁昕景, 夏玲, 王学林, 等. 不同甜瓜品种生长特性及耐盐性比较[J]. 分子植物育种, 2023: 1-20.
	LIANG Xinjing, XIA Ling, WANG Xuelin, et al. Comparing of growth characteristics and salt tolerance among different melon varieties[J]. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2023: 1-20.
[23]	鲁成凯, 卢家毅, 宋晓峰, 等. 高油酸花生品种(系)耐碱性评价[J]. 山东农业科学, 2023, 55(9): 25-31.
	LU Chengkai, LU Jiayi, SONG Xiaofeng, et al. Evaluation on alkali tolerance of peanut varieties (lines) with high oleic acid[J]. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 55(9): 25-31.
[24]	兰艳, 朱林, 王甜甜, 等. 混合盐碱胁迫对3种稗属牧草种子萌发的影响[J]. 种子, 2022, 41(3): 37-44.
	LAN Yan, ZHU Lin, WANG Tiantian, et al. Effects of mixed saline-alkali stress on seed germination of three kinds of Echinochloa Grass[J]. Seed, 2022, 41(3): 37-44.
[25]	陈军, 关欣, 范翠枝, 等. 盐胁迫对番茄种子萌发中多胺形态变化和抗氧化的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2021, 58(6): 1598-1609.
	CHEN Jun, GUAN Xin, FAN Cuizhi, et al. Effects of salt stress on form of polyamine and antioxidation in germinating tomato seed[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2021, 58(6): 1598-1609.
[26]	史超逸, 房闵, 图雅, 等. 不同预处理方式对苦豆子种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 草原与草坪, 2023, 43(3): 146-155.
	SHI Chaoyi, FANG Min, Tu Ya, et al. Effects of different pretreatment on seed germination and seedling growth of Sophora alopecuroides[J]. Grassland and Turf, 2023, 43(3): 146-155.
[27]	杨淑萍, 危常州, 梁永超. 盐胁迫对不同基因型海岛棉种子萌发特性的影响[J]. 中国棉花, 2012, 39(12): 6-10. DOI
	YANG Shuping, WEI Changzhou, LIANG Yongchao. Effects of NaCl stress on characteristics of seed germination of sea island cotton with different genotypes[J]. China Cotton, 2012, 39(12): 6-10. DOI
[28]	向雪纯, 张云玲, 李培英. 4种藜科植物萌发期耐盐性[J]. 草业科学, 2022, 39(10): 2151-2159.
	XIANG Xuechun, ZHANG Yunling, LI Peiying. Comprehensive evaluation of salt tolerance among four species of Chenopodiaceae at the germination stage[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2022, 39(10): 2151-2159.
[29]	李娟霞, 白小明, 张翠, 等. 不同盐分类型对一年生早熟禾种子萌发和幼苗生长的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(7): 1131-1140. DOI
	LI Juanxia, BAI Xiaoming, ZHANG Cui, et al. Effects of different salt types on seed germination and seedling growth of Poa annua[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(7): 1131-1140. DOI
[30]	陈莹. 新疆陆地棉品种种子耐盐碱能力的鉴定与筛选[D]. 石河子: 石河子大学, 2022.
	CHEN Yin. Identification and screening of saline-alkali tolerance of upland cotton varieties in Xinjiang[D]. Shihezi: Shihezi University, 2022.
[31]	王娅琳, 魏琳, 李娜, 等. 3种牧草种子萌发期耐盐性综合评价[J]. 草业科学, 2023, 40(12): 3104-3113.
	WANG Yalin, WEI Lin, LI Na, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of salt tolerance of three forage seed varieties during germination[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2023, 40(12): 3104-3113.
[32]	赵颖, 魏小红, 赫亚龙, 等. 混合盐碱胁迫对藜麦种子萌发和幼苗抗氧化特性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(2): 156-167. DOI
	ZHAO Ying, WEI Xiaohong, HE Yalong, et al. Effects of complex saline-alkali stress on seed germination and seedling antioxidant characteristics of Chenopodium[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(2): 156-167. DOI
[33]	杨迎月, 毛桂莲, 麻冬梅, 等. 四种牧草种子在不同浓度NaCl或NaHCO₃胁迫下的萌发特性[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(3): 637-645. DOI
	YANG Yingyue, MAO Guilian, MA Dongmei, et al. Germination characteristics of four forage seeds under different concentrations of NaCl or NaHCO₃ stress[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(3): 637-645. DOI

品种 Cultivar	千粒重 Thousandgrain weight (g)	提供单位 Provider
新陆中84号 Xinluzhong 84	93.65	新疆天玉种业有限责任公司
塔河2号 Tahei 2	91.45	新疆塔里木河种业股份有限公司
新陆中40号 Xinluzhong 40	91.97	阿克苏科润种业有限责任公司
酒棉18号 Jiumian 18	89.06	新疆守信种业科技有限责任公司

品种 Cultivar	千粒重 Thousandgrain weight (g)	提供单位 Provider
新陆中84号 Xinluzhong 84	93.65	新疆天玉种业有限责任公司
塔河2号 Tahei 2	91.45	新疆塔里木河种业股份有限公司
新陆中40号 Xinluzhong 40	91.97	阿克苏科润种业有限责任公司
酒棉18号 Jiumian 18	89.06	新疆守信种业科技有限责任公司

处理 Treatments	浓度 Concentration (mmol/L)	pH值 pH value	电导率 Electrical conductivity (mS/cm)	处理 Treatments	浓度 Concentration (mmol/L)	pH值 pH value	电导率 Electrical conductivity (mS/cm)
S₁	40	7	4.78	S₃	40	9	3.1
	60	7	7.39		60	9.1	4.31
	80	7	9.84		80	9.2	5.7
	100	7	12.19		100	9.2	6.94
	120	7	14.45		120	9.4	8.4
	140	7	16.76		140	9.5	9.75
	160	7.2	18.17		160	9.5	10.74
S₂	40	7	4.14	S₄	40	9	0.18
	60	7.2	5.84		60	9	2.65
	80	7.2	7.75		80	9	3.4
	100	7.2	9.69		100	9	4.32
	120	7.2	11.97		120	9	5.25
	140	7.5	13.68		140	9.1	6.11
	160	7.5	15.19		160	9.1	6.75

处理 Treatments	浓度 Concentration (mmol/L)	pH值 pH value	电导率 Electrical conductivity (mS/cm)	处理 Treatments	浓度 Concentration (mmol/L)	pH值 pH value	电导率 Electrical conductivity (mS/cm)
S₁	40	7	4.78	S₃	40	9	3.1
	60	7	7.39		60	9.1	4.31
	80	7	9.84		80	9.2	5.7
	100	7	12.19		100	9.2	6.94
	120	7	14.45		120	9.4	8.4
	140	7	16.76		140	9.5	9.75
	160	7.2	18.17		160	9.5	10.74
S₂	40	7	4.14	S₄	40	9	0.18
	60	7.2	5.84		60	9	2.65
	80	7.2	7.75		80	9	3.4
	100	7.2	9.69		100	9	4.32
	120	7.2	11.97		120	9	5.25
	140	7.5	13.68		140	9.1	6.11
	160	7.5	15.19		160	9.1	6.75

处理 Treat- ments	浓度 Conce- ntration (mmol/L)	新陆中84号Xinluzhong 84		塔河2号Tahe 2		新陆中40号Xinluzhong 40		酒棉18号Jiumian 18
处理 Treat- ments	浓度 Conce- ntration (mmol/L)	初始萌发时间 GIT(d)	平均萌发天数 AGT(d)	初始萌发时间 GIT(d)	平均萌发天数 AGT(d)	初始萌发时间 GIT(d)	平均萌发天数 AGT(d)	初始萌发时间 GIT(d)	平均萌发天数 AGT(d)
S₁	0	3	1.29±0.04^b	3	1.02±0.1^b	3	1.35±0.03^b	3	1.35±0.18^a
	40	3	1.65±0.08^a	3	1.4±0.18^a	3	1.62±0.07^a	3	1.45±0.13^a
	60	3	1.84±0.05^a	3	1.41±0.19^a	3	1.67±0.07^a	3	1.34±0.08^a
	80	3	1.66±0.03^a	4	1.21±0.1^ab	3	0.81±0.05^c	3	1.18±0.25^a
	100	4	1.18±0.04^bc	5	0.53±0.05^c	4	0.78±0.13^c	4	0.8±0.17^b
	120	4	1.03±0.25^cd	6	0.44±0.11^cd	5	0.68±0.16^c	5	0.1±0.1^c
	140	5	0.8±0.17^d	6	0.22±0.06^de	5	0.35±0.03^d	-	0±0^c
	160	7	0.23±0.12^e	6	0.07±0.06^e	-	0±0^e	-	0±0^c
S₂	0	3	1.29±0.04^b	3	1.02±0.1^b	3	1.35±0.03^a	3	1.35±0.18^a
	40	3	1.74±0.1^a	3	1.38±0.21^a	3	1.44±0.22^a	3	1.62±0.16^a
	60	3	1.79±0.06^a	3	1.18±0.24^ab	3	0.92±0.35^b	3	1.46±0.36^a
	80	3	1.88±0.13^a	3	1.01±0.16^b	3	0.91±0.15^b	3	1.36±0.2^a
	100	4	1.88±0.08^a	3	0.65±0.12^c	3	0.79±0.21^b	4	0.79±0.12^b
	120	5	1.39±0.12^b	3	0.33±0.15^d	4	0.27±0.03^c	8	0.45±0.1^bc
	140	6	0.68±0.06^c	6	0.16±0.04^d	5	0.19±0.02^c	12	0.1±0.09^cd
	160	-	0±0^d	10	0.14±0.01^d	11	0.1±0.09^c	-	0±0^d
S₃	0	3	1.29±0.04^c	3	1.02±0.1^b	3	1.35±0.03^b	3	1.35±0.18^b
	40	3	2.07±0.03^a	3	1.56±0.11^a	3	1.58±0.13^a	5	1.78±0.14^a
	60	3	1.54±0.18^b	3	0.69±0.1^c	3	1.68±0.08^a	6	0.64±0.07^c
	80	3	1.24±0.16^c	3	0.73±0.12^c	3	1.04±0.1^c	12	0.05±0.09^d
	100	7	1.16±0.08^c	5	0.69±0.07^c	7	0.74±0.08^d	-	0±0^d
	120	-	0±0^d	-	0±0^d	7	0.12±0.13^e	-	0±0^d
	140	-	0±0^d	-	0±0^d	-	0±0^e	-	0±0^d
	160	-	0±0^d	-	0±0^d	-	0±0^e	-	0±0^d
S₄	0	3	1.29±0.04^b	3	1.02±0.1^b	3	1.35±0.03^bc	3	1.35±0.18^c
	40	3	1.84±0.09^a	3	1.44±0.02^a	3	2.2±0.04^a	3	2.14±0.05^a
	60	3	2±0.15^a	3	1.45±0.13^a	5	2.25±0.05^a	4	1.56±0.01^b
	80	5	1.94±0.13^a	5	0.72±0.07^c	7	1.53±0.04^b	5	0.87±0.05^d
	100	5	1.03±0.16^c	7	0.18±0.08^d	7	1.2±0.24^c	12	0.15±0^e
	120	5	0.26±0.08^d	7	0.08±0.08^de	11	0.15±0.01^d	-	0±0^f
	140	9	0.09±0.08^de	-	0±0^e	-	0±0^d	-	0±0^f
	160	-	0±0^e	-	0±0^e	-	0±0^d	-	0±0^f

不同类型盐碱胁迫对棉花种子萌发的影响

Effects of different types of salt and alkali stress on cotton seed germination

在线阅读

PDF下载

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 33

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

品种 Cultivar	盐浓度 Salt concen- tration (mmol/L)	S₁		S₂		S₃		S₄
品种 Cultivar	盐浓度 Salt concen- tration (mmol/L)	鲜重 Fresh weight	干重 Dry weight	鲜重 Fresh weight	干重 Dry weight	鲜重 Fresh weight	干重 Dry weight	鲜重 Fresh weight	干重 Dry weight
新陆中84号 Xinluzhong 84	0	2.54±0.02^a	0.58±0.01^a	2.54±0.02^a	0.58±0.01^a	2.54±0.02^a	0.58±0.01^a	2.54±0.02^a	0.58±0.01^a
	40	2.5±0^a	0.57±0.01^b	2.51±0.01^a	0.58±0.01^a	1.44±0.04^b	0.52±0.01^b	1.98±0.04^b	0.55±0.02^b
	60	2.42±0.09^a	0.56±0.01^b	2.31±0.06^b	0.55±0^b	1.18±0.01^c	0.52±0^b	1.84±0.01^c	0.54±0.01^bc
	80	2.26±0.11^b	0.55±0^c	1.76±0.12^c	0.51±0.01^c	1.08±0^d	0.51±0^bc	1.8±0.04^c	0.52±0.01^c
	100	2.12±0.06^c	0.53±0^d	1.75±0.13^c	0.51±0.01^c	1.03±0^e	0.5±0^c	1.63±0.05^d	0.52±0^c
	120	1.96±0.04^d	0.51±0^e	1.53±0.01^d	0.5±0^c	0±0^f	0±0^d	1.2±0^e	0.43±0^d
	140	1.87±0.03^d	0.45±0.01^f	1.33±0^e	0.5±0^c	0±0^f	0±0^d	1.1±0^f	0.42±0^d
	160	0±0^e	0±0^g	0±0^f	0±0^d	0±0^f	0±0^d	0±0^g	0±0^e
塔河2号 Tahe 2	0	2.58±0.08^a	0.54±0.03^a	2.58±0.08^b	0.54±0.03^b	2.58±0.08^a	0.54±0.03^a	2.58±0.08^a	0.54±0.03^a
	40	2.51±0.02^a	0.51±0.01^ab	2.87±0.22^a	0.57±0.01^a	2.39±0.04^b	0.51±0.01^b	2.53±0.12^a	0.52±0.01^ab
	60	2.14±0.09^b	0.51±0.01^ab	2.5±0.07^bc	0.51±0.01^c	2.31±0.05^c	0.5±0^b	2.37±0.11^b	0.51±0.01^b
	80	2.08±0.02^b	0.5±0.01^b	2.34±0.03^c	0.5±0^c	2.17±0^d	0.45±0^c	2.29±0.03^b	0.46±0^c
	100	1.9±0^c	0.46±0.01^c	2.1±0.06^d	0.49±0.01^cd	1.8±0^e	0.29±0^d	2.1±0^c	0.45±0^c
	120	1.41±0.11^d	0.46±0.01^c	1.98±0.07^d	0.47±0.01^d	0±0^f	0±0^e	0±0^d	0±0^d
	140	1.3±0.05^de	0.44±0.01^cd	1.88±0.06^d	0.4±0^e	0±0^f	0±0^e	0±0^d	0±0^d
	160	1.23±0^e	0.43±0^d	0±0^e	0±0^f	0±0^f	0±0^e	0±0^d	0±0^d
新陆中40号 Xinluzhong 40	0	2.28±0.04^a	0.53±0^a	2.28±0.04^a	0.53±0^a	2.28±0.04^a	0.53±0^a	2.28±0.04^a	0.53±0^a
	40	1.96±0.06^b	0.52±0.01^ab	1.69±0.06^b	0.47±0.01^b	1.74±0.11^b	0.48±0.01^b	1.53±0.07^b	0.47±0.01^b
	60	1.87±0.1^bc	0.52±0.01^ab	1.56±0^c	0.44±0^c	1.66±0.04^bc	0.43±0.01^c	1.43±0.03^c	0.45±0.01^c
	80	1.79±0.02^c	0.51±0^b	1.56±0^c	0.43±0^d	1.61±0^c	0.43±0^d	1.44±0.01^c	0.44±0.01^c
	100	1.63±0^d	0.48±0^c	1.26±0.03^d	0.43±0.01^d	1.07±0^d	0.41±0^e	1.4±0^c	0.4±0^d
	120	1.6±0.01^de	0.46±0.01^d	1.25±0^d	0.43±0^d	0±0^e	0±0^f	0±0^d	0±0^e
	140	1.51±0^e	0.43±0.01^e	1.21±0^d	0.38±0^e	0±0^e	0±0^f	0±0^d	0±0^e
	160	0±0^f	0±0^f	0±0^e	0±0^f	0±0^e	0±0^f	0±0^d	0±0^e
酒棉18号 Jiumian 18	0	2.25±0.08^a	0.52±0^a	2.25±0.08^a	0.52±0^a	2.25±0.08^a	0.52±0^a	2.25±0.08^a	0.52±0^a
	40	2.19±0.12^a	0.47±0^b	1.66±0.03^b	0.46±0.01^b	1.61±0.14^b	0.45±0.01^b	1.52±0.14^b	0.44±0.01^b
	60	2.02±0.07^b	0.46±0.01^b	1.57±0.04^b	0.46±0^bc	1.25±0.14^c	0.4±0.01^c	1.39±0.14^bc	0.39±0.01^c
	80	1.76±0.06^c	0.46±0.01^bc	1.54±0.19^b	0.45±0^cd	0±0^d	0±0^d	1.28±0.21^c	0.34±0.01^d
	100	1.52±0.01^d	0.44±0.02^c	1.54±0.13^b	0.44±0.01^d	0±0^d	0±0^d	0±0^d	0±0^e
	120	1.5±0^d	0.37±0^d	1.26±0.01^c	0.4±0.01^e	0±0^d	0±0^d	0±0^d	0±0^e
	140	0±0^e	0±0^e	0±0^d	0±0^f	0±0^d	0±0^d	0±0^d	0±0^e
	160	0±0^e	0±0^e	0±0^d	0±0^f	0±0^d	0±0^d	0±0^d	0±0^e

处理 Treatments	发芽势 GP	发芽率 GR	发芽指数 GI	活力指数 VI	鲜重 Fresh weight	干重 Dry weight
S₁	-0.96^**	-0.92^**	-0.97^**	-0.95^**	-0.79^**	-0.66^**
S₂	-0.93^**	-0.90^**	-0.96^**	-0.91^**	-0.79^**	-0.71^**
S₃	-0.80^**	-0.91^**	-0.89^**	-0.84^**	-0.88^**	-0.85^**
S₄	-0.80^**	-0.91^**	-0.91^**	-0.86^**	-0.85^**	-0.80^**

处理 Treatments	品种 Cultivar	拟合方程 Fitting equation	R²	耐盐阈值 Salt tolerance threshold (mmol/L)
S₁	新陆中84号	Y₌ -66.94 + 169.49/[1 + (X_/154.75)^3.33]	0.978 4	121.73
	塔河2号	Y₌3.76 + 85.14/[1 + (X_/89.74)^5.87]	0.987 2	90.70
	新陆中40号	Y₌ -10.38 + 114.06/[1 + (X_/95.48)^3.54]	0.969 4	92.36
	酒棉18号	Y₌ -9.85 + 89.65/[1 + (X_/98.35)^5.49]	0.984 5	91.83
S₂	新陆中84号	Y₌ -30.67 + 130.47/[1 + (X_/136.75)^7.56]	0.999 8	128.30
	塔河2号	Y₌ -8.25+99.48/[1 + (X_/94.49)^3.83]	0.997 3	91.07
	新陆中40号	Y₌ -54.98 + 155.25/[1 + (X_/124.23)^1.81]	0.967 1	82.68
	酒棉18号	Y₌ -11.98 + 99.13/[1 + (X_/101.25)^4.76]	0.992 4	94.35
S₃	新陆中84号	Y₌ -28.98 + 127.10/[1 + (X_/98.9)^3.18]	0.953 4	84.62
	塔河2号	Y₌ -10.03 + 103.48/[1 + (X_/71.05)^2.93]	0.936	68.04
	新陆中40号	Y₌ -8.96 + 105.26/[1 + (X_/85.79)^4.47]	0.984 2	81.27
	酒棉18号	Y₌ -1.18 + 92.19/[1 + (X_/52.30)^6.15]	0.998	51.97
S₄	新陆中84号	Y₌ -1.19 + 98.66/[1 + (X_/99.01)^9.29]	0.999 1	98.21
	塔河2号	Y₌1.61 + 88.19/[1 + (X_/75.69)^11.03]	0.998 4	75.91
	新陆中40号	Y₌ -10.21 + 108/[1 + (X_/96.75)^5.68]	0.978 0	92.90
	酒棉18号	Y₌ -3.13 + 94.29/[1 + (X_/74.41)^6.17]	0.994 4	73.49

处理 Treatments	品种 Cultivar	隶属函数值Subordinate function value						综合评价值 D	排序 Rank
处理 Treatments	品种 Cultivar	发芽势 GP	发芽率 GR	发芽指数 GI	活力指数 VI	鲜重 FW	干重 DW	综合评价值 D	排序 Rank
S₁	新陆中84号	1	1	1	1	1	0.65	0.95	1
	塔河2号	0	0.19	0	0	0.75	1	0.28	3
	新陆中40号	0.27	0.25	0.55	0.37	0.47	0.67	0.40	2
	酒棉18号	0.31	0	0.45	0.45	0	0	0.20	4
	权重	0.20	0.23	0.14	0.16	0.14	0.13	0
S₂	新陆中84号	0.60	1	1	1	0.54	0.99	0.88	1
	塔河2号	1	0.27	0.25	0.81	1	1	0.65	2
	新陆中40号	0.70	0	0.09	0	0.19	0.52	0.19	3
	酒棉18号	0	0.20	0	0.14	0	0	0.06	4
	权重	0.11	0.19	0.24	0.18	0.16	0.12	0
S₃	新陆中84号	0.11	1	0.67	0.29	0.28	1	0.49	3
	塔河2号	1	0.67	0.78	1	1	0.85	0.91	1
	新陆中40号	0.85	0.92	1	0.92	0.67	0.88	0.87	2
	酒棉18号	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	4
	权重	0.24	0.14	0.14	0.18	0.18	0.13	0
S₄	新陆中84号	0.50	1	1	0.77	1	1	0.85	1
	塔河2号	1	0.18	0.74	1	0.92	0.46	0.73	2
	新陆中40号	0	0.73	0.18	0.12	0.36	0.37	0.27	3
	酒棉18号	0.09	0	0	0	0	0	0.02	4
	权重	0.21	0.17	0.17	0.18	0.13	0.14

[1]	李永泰, 高阿香, 李艳军, 张新宇. 脱叶剂对不同敏感性棉花品种生理特性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2094-2102.
[2]	张泽华, 叶含春, 王振华, 李文昊, 李海强, 刘健. 等氮配施脲酶抑制剂对滴灌棉花生长发育和产量及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2103-2111.
[3]	陈瑞杰, 罗林毅, 阮向阳, 冶军. 腐植酸对滴灌棉田土壤养分和棉花产量及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2112-2121.
[4]	黄铂轩, 李鹏程, 郑苍松, 孙淼, 邵晶晶, 冯卫娜, 庞朝友, 徐文修, 董合林. 不同氮素抑制剂对棉花生长发育、氮素利用与产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2122-2131.
[5]	王超, 徐文修, 李鹏程, 郑苍松, 孙淼, 冯卫娜, 邵晶晶, 董合林. 棉花苗期生长发育对土壤速效钾水平的响应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2132-2139.
[6]	张帆, 陈晓露, 王洁, 侯献飞, 贾东海, 顾元国, 苗昊翠, 李强. 混合盐碱胁迫对花生种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2168-2182.
[7]	张庭军, 李字辉, 崔豫疆, 孙孝贵, 陈芳. 微生物菌剂对棉花生长及土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2269-2276.
[8]	奚瑞, 陈怡佳, 李宁, 余庆辉, 王强, 秦勇. 外源2, 4-表芸苔素内酯对盐胁迫下不同盐敏感型番茄种子萌发的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1983-1992.
[9]	赖成霞, 杨延龙, 李春平, 玛依拉·玉素音, 王燕, 杨栋, 阳妮, 葛风伟, 汪鹏龙, 马君. 落叶型棉花黄萎病的生物学特征及药剂防治分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 2034-2042.
[10]	刘慧杰, 王俊豪, 龚照龙, 梁亚军, 王俊铎, 李雪源, 郑巨云, 王冀川. 197份陆地棉品种萌发期耐盐性鉴定[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(7): 1574-1581.
[11]	高君, 侯献飞, 苗昊翠, 贾东海, 顾元国, 汪天玲, 黄奕, 陈晓露, 李强. 棉花-花生轮作模式对花生干物质积累量分配及产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(7): 1648-1656.
[12]	侯献飞, 李强, 苗昊翠, 贾东海, 顾元国, 买买提依明·斯马依, 崔福洋. 棉花-花生轮作模式对土壤养分及其产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(7): 1657-1665.
[13]	马百幻, 赵强, 谢佳, 徐开玥, 任若飞, 宋兴虎. 生物药剂复配对棉花黄萎病防治及生长发育的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(7): 1748-1756.
[14]	叶萍毅, 龙遗磊, 谭彦平, 杜霄, 安梦洁, 陶志鑫, 梁发瑞, 艾先涛, 胡守林. 陆地棉果枝夹角与机采农艺性状鉴定评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(6): 1318-1327.
[15]	邵亚杰, 李珂, 丁文浩, 林涛, 崔建平, 郭仁松, 王亮, 吴凤全, 王心, 汤秋香. 基于无人机多光谱影像特征估算棉花生物量[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(6): 1328-1335.