期刊文献+

干旱胁迫下桃树各部位贮存水调节能力的研究 被引量:10

Study on the adjustment of reserved water in different part of nectarine tree in drought stress
下载PDF
导出
摘要 干旱胁迫使桃品种瑞光5号(Prunuspersicavar.nectarinacv.RuiguangNo.5)的叶片水势和茎流下降,并且干旱越严重下降越多。干旱胁迫对贮存水调节量的影响不显著,但是绝对调节能力随干旱胁迫程度的增加而增加。各部位间的相对调节能力主要是由其水容、贮存水阻力和体积决定的,干旱胁迫对各部位间的相对调节能力的影响不显著。在充分灌水条件下各部位贮存水夜间的相对调节能力为:主根18.8%、主干38.5%、枝条17.8%、叶片3.4%、细根2.9%、果实6.7%、粗根12.0%,处理之间绝对调节能力的差异不显著。贮存水的调节主要来自主干、主根、粗根和枝条,这4部分占全部调节量的80%以上。 The leaf water potential and sap flow in different part of the tree of Ruiguang 5 nectarine cultivar (Prunus persica var. nectarina Maxim.) became lower when in drought stress. It was lightly influenced by bulk of reserved water adjustment in drought stress, but the absolute reserved water adjustment was depended on sap flow, which influenced by soil water conditions. The relative reserved water adjustment was not evidently influenced in different part of the tree, which depended on water capacity, reserved water resistance and bulk of the part. The relative reserved water adjustments in different part of control were: main root 18.8%, stem 38.5%, branch 17.8%, leaves 3.4%, fine root 2.9%, fruit 6.7%, thick root 12.0% in night. There was no difference among different treatments in relative reserved water adjustment. Above 80% adjustment was adjusted by stem, main root, thick root and branch.
出处 《果树学报》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2006年第1期5-8,共4页 Journal of Fruit Science
基金 科技部星火计划(2003EA600032 2004EA600031) 北京市科委项目(H012010450119 Z0004096040221) 北京市自然科学基金资助。
关键词 干旱胁迫 贮存水 调节 Nectarine Drought stress Reserved water Adjustment
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献42

  • 1吴林,李亚东,刘洪,章郝瑞.果树水分胁迫研究进展[J].吉林农业大学学报,1996,18(2):91-97. 被引量:28
  • 2[6]Li J H, Dugas W A, Hymus G J, et al. Direct and indirect effects of elevated CO2 on transpiration from Quercusmyrtifolia in a scrub-oak ecosystem[J]. International Journal of Dairy Technology, 2003, (9):96-105 .
  • 3[7]Maherali H, Delucia E H. Influence of climate-driven shifts in biomass allocation on water transport and storage in ponderosa pine[J]. Oecologia,2001, 129:481-491 .
  • 4[8]Lhomme J P. Elguero E, Chehbouni A, et al. Stomatal control of transpiration: examination of Monteith's formulation of canopy resistance[J]. Water Resour Res, 1998, 34:2301-2308.
  • 5[9]Jarvis P J. The interpretation of the variations in leaf water potential and stomatal conductance found in canopies in the field[J]. Phil Trans Roy Soc Lond Ser B, 1976, 273:593-610.
  • 6[10]Yu Gui-Rui, Nakayama K, Matsuoka N, et al. A combination model for estimating stomatal conductance of maize(Zea mays L.) leaves over a long term[J].Agricultural and Forest Meteorology,1998,92:9-28.
  • 7[12]Gibberd M R, Walker R R, Condon A G. Whole-plant transpiration efficiency of Sultana grapevine grown under saline conditions is increased through the use of a Cl--excluding rootstock[J]. Functional Plant Biology, 2003, 30:643-652.
  • 8[13]Jones H G, Lakso A N, Syvertsen J P. Physiological control of water status in temperate and subtropical fruit tree[J]. Hor Rev, 1985,(7):301-304.
  • 9[14]Johnson I R, Melkonian J J, Thornley J H M, et al. A model of water flow through plants incorporating shoot/root 'message' control of stomatal conductance[J]. Plant Cell Environ, 1991, 14:531-544.
  • 10[15]Zhang J, Davies W J. Does ABA in the xylem control the rate of leaf growth in soil dried maize and sunflower plants[J]. Journal of Experiment Botany, 1990, 41:1125-1132.

共引文献29

同被引文献225

引证文献10

二级引证文献67

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部