|Table of Contents|

Effects of SAP and SAP Mixted Coir Pith on Physiological Characteristics of Brassica rapa L.‘Shanghaiqing’ Under Drought Stress(PDF)

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2013年20期
Page:
21-24
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Effects of SAP and SAP Mixted Coir Pith on Physiological Characteristics of Brassica rapa L.‘Shanghaiqing’ Under Drought Stress
Author(s):
WANG YanLIU Shu-wei
College of Biological Science and Technology,Qiongzhou University,Sanya,Hainan 572022
Keywords:
super absorbent polymer(SAP)drought stressBrassica rapa L.‘Shanghaiqing’physiological index
PACS:
S 634.3
DOI:
-
Abstract:
Taking polyacrylamide type water retention agent as material,Brassica rapa L.‘Shanghaiqing’ as study object,different doses of SAP polycrylamide and SPA polycrylamide mixted coir pith were applied to seedling of ?Brassica rapa L.‘Shanghaiqing’ to study its physiological characteristics under drought stress,in order to provide references for SAP that used rationally on vegetable cultivation in Hainan’ brick-red soil during seasonal drought.The results showed that the treatments of SAP and SAP mixted coir pith were better than CK,which chlorophyll content and root activity decreased with the strengthening of drought,the order was CK>B1(15 kg/hm2 SAP)>B3(75 kg/hm2 SAP)>YB1(15 kg/hm2 SAP+15 kg/hm2 coir pith)>B2(45 kg/hm2 SAP)>YB2(45 kg/hm2 SAP+45 kg/hm2 coir pith)>YB3(75 kg/hm2 SAP+75 kg/hm2 coir pith),and the content of proline and MDA increased with the strengthening of drought,the order was CK>B1>YB1>B3>B2>YB2>YB3 and CK>B1>B3>YB1>B2>YB2>YB3 respectively,and B1~YB3 survival time were extended by 0.33,2.67,1.33,0.67,3.33,5.00 days.So B2(45 kg/hm2) that single application of SAP was best to resist the drought for ‘Shanghaiqing’ and was cultivated in brick-red soil of Hainan,and YB3 (75 kg/hm2 SAP+75 kg/hm2 coir pith) was more suitable if SAP mixted coir pith.

References:

[1]宫丽丹,殷振华.保水剂在农业生产上的应用研究[J].中国农学通报,2009,25(22):174-177.

[2]WalkerP,Kelley T.Solids,organicload and nutrient concentration reductions?in swine waste slurry using a polya-crylamide(PAM)-aided sllids flocculation treantment[J].Water Research,2005,39:333-334.

[3]陈宝玉,王洪君,曹铁华,.干旱胁迫下保水剂对廊坊杨苗木光合性能的影响[J].土壤通报,2011,42(1):163-168.

[4]袁惠燕,包文华,方芳,.保水剂对土壤含水率与暖地型草坪草种子萌发的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2010,38(35):19979,19989.

[5]汤文光,唐海明,肖小平,.不同保水措施对南方季节性干旱区春玉米的影响[J].中国农业科技导报,2011,13(3):102-107.

[6]彭河忠.干旱胁迫下保水剂对马蔺和鸢尾的影响[D].南京:南京林业大学,2012:29.

[7]相宗国,赵瑞,陈俊琴.不同粉碎度的椰糠基质对黄瓜穴盘苗生长发育及其质量的影响[J].中国蔬菜,2012(14):65-69.

[8]狄文伟,赵瑞,张婷,.基于椰糠的基质配比对袋培黄瓜生长的影响[J].湖北农业科学,2008,47(4):440-442.

[9]萧浪涛,王三根.植物生理学技术[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2005:65-67,112-113.

[10]董守坤,赵坤,刘丽君,.干旱胁迫对春大豆叶绿素含量和根系活力的影响[J].大豆科学,2011,30(6):949-953.

[11]Nazapli H,Zapdashti P.The effect of drought stress and super absorbent polymer(A200) on agronomical traits of sunflower(Helianthus annuusL.)under field condition[J].Cercetari Agronomice in Moldova,2010(3):5-14.

[12]李林轩,唐美琼,梁莹,.广豆根幼苗对干旱胁迫的生理响应[J].北方园艺,2012(10):181-183.

[13]王存纲,郭丽.水分胁迫对大岩桐生理生化指标的影响[J].浙江农业科学,2013(1):35-37,43.

[14]卜楠,俞丽蓉,马万里,.不同水分条件下沙漠豆生理指标的变化[J].中国水土保持科学,2012,10(6):77-81.

[15]杜建军,李永胜,崔英德,.不同保水剂及用量对砂培黄瓜幼苗生长和水分利用效率的影响[J].中国农学通报,2006,22(11):472-476.

[16]王春雨,魏珉,董传迁,.保水剂不同用量对番茄穴盘苗生长及生理特性的影响[J].山东农业科学,2010(7):36-38.


Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2014-08-26