范元芳, 杨峰, 何知舟, 王锐, 刘沁林, 袁小琴, 雍太文, 武晓玲, 杨文钰. 套作大豆形态、光合特征对玉米荫蔽及光照恢复的响应[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2016, 24(5): 608-617.
引用本文: 范元芳, 杨峰, 何知舟, 王锐, 刘沁林, 袁小琴, 雍太文, 武晓玲, 杨文钰. 套作大豆形态、光合特征对玉米荫蔽及光照恢复的响应[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2016, 24(5): 608-617.
FAN Yuanfang, YANG Feng, HE Zhizhou, WANG Rui, LIU Qinlin, YUAN Xiaoqin, YONG Taiwen, WU Xiaoling, YANG Wenyu. Effects of shading and light recovery on soybean morphology and photosynthetic characteristics in soybean-maize intercropping system[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2016, 24(5): 608-617.
Citation: FAN Yuanfang, YANG Feng, HE Zhizhou, WANG Rui, LIU Qinlin, YUAN Xiaoqin, YONG Taiwen, WU Xiaoling, YANG Wenyu. Effects of shading and light recovery on soybean morphology and photosynthetic characteristics in soybean-maize intercropping system[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2016, 24(5): 608-617.

套作大豆形态、光合特征对玉米荫蔽及光照恢复的响应

Effects of shading and light recovery on soybean morphology and photosynthetic characteristics in soybean-maize intercropping system

  • 摘要: 为探寻大豆在荫蔽胁迫及光照恢复后的形态建成和光合生理的响应策略, 选用‘简阳九月黄’、‘江浦黑豆’和‘永胜黑豆’ 3个大豆材料, 以单作和玉米大豆带状套作种植模式为研究对象, 分析套作荫蔽及光照恢复后大豆形态特征、光合速率、叶片解剖结构、光合色素含量等参数的响应特征。结果表明: 套作种植下, 大豆在第5片复叶展开(V5)期明显受玉米荫蔽胁迫, 与单作大豆相比, 株高显著增加, 茎粗和地上部分生物量显著降低; 其茎、叶和柄生物量分别是地上部生物量的58%、37%和6%, 而单作下分别为36%、50%和14%, 套作荫蔽下大豆的地上部分生物量分配中心由叶片改变为茎秆。同时, 叶片厚度、栅栏组织厚度、海绵组织厚度、叶绿素a含量、叶绿素a/b及净光合速率下降, 但叶绿素b含量和栅栏组织厚度/海绵组织厚度比值增加。玉米收获解除荫蔽胁迫后, 在大豆鼓粒期(R6), 株高、茎粗、叶面积和地上部分生物量积累与单作的差异缩小, 茎、叶和柄生物量为地上部生物量的41%、49%和10%; 叶片、栅栏组织和海绵组织厚度比V5期(玉豆共生期)分别增加117%、99%和81%; 光合色素与单作相比差异不显著, 但净光合速率显著低于单作。玉米大豆带状套作下的3个大豆材料的单株产量差异较大, ‘简阳九月黄’、‘江浦黑豆’和‘永胜黑豆’的单株产量分别较单作下降33%、64%和40%。因此, 大豆能够通过形态、光合生理特征的可塑性来适应光环境, 但品种间存在差异。

     

    Abstract: Light environment directly affects crop growth, resulting in yield change. Three soybean varieties were used to investigate the characteristics of morphology and photosynthetic physiology under shading and light recovery conditions to explore response of soybean to light environment change. Relay strip intercropping with maize and monoculture planting patterns of soybean were investigated in term of light environment. Morphological characteristics, net photosynthetic rate, leaf anatomical structure and chlorophyll content of soybean were analyzed in the study. The results indicated that stem diameter, biomass, leaf thickness (including palisade and spongy tissues), chlorophyll a content, chlorophyll a/b and net photosynthetic rate of soybean decreased significantly at V5 stage (symbiotic period of maize and soybean) in relay intercropping compared with monoculture systems. The results of plant height, chlorophyll b content and thickness ratio between palisade and spongy tissue were the reverse for intercropping. In addition, the fractions of stem, leaf and stripe biomass accounted for 58%, 37% and 6%, respectively, of total above-ground biomass under relay intercropping, and 36%, 50% and 14% under mono-cropping. The results revealed that dry matter production center was transformed from leaves to stems under shading condition. When shading was removed after maize harvest, the differences among plant height, stem diameter, leaf area and biomass accumulation of above-ground biomass of soybean decreased at seed-filling stage of soybean (R6) between relay intercropping and monoculture treatments. The fractions of stem, leaf and stipe of total biomass were 41%, 49% and 10%, respectively. The thickness of leaf, palisade tissue and spongy tissue increased by 117%, 99% and 81%, respectively, compared with those at V5 stage (symbiotic period of maize and soybean). There was no significant difference in photosynthetic pigments between relay intercropping and monoculture after light recovery in relay intercropping. Photosynthetic rate of intercropped soybean significantly decreased, compared with that of mono-cropping. The yields of the three soybean varieties had significant difference in relay strip intercropping. Relay strip intercropping decreased per-plant yields of soybean varieties of ‘Jianyangjiuyuehuang’, ‘Jiangpuheidou’ and ‘Yongshengheidou’ by 33%, 64% and 40%, respectively, compared with soybean monoculture. It was therefore concluded that soybean was adaptable to changes in light environment due to plasticity in morphology and photosynthetic physiology. There were, however, differences in plasticity between different varieties.

     

/

返回文章
返回