|Table of Contents|

The Drought Resistance of Two Rocky Slope Ecological Restoration Plants Under Drought Stress Condition(PDF)

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2014年24期
Page:
70-73
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
The Drought Resistance of Two Rocky Slope Ecological Restoration Plants Under Drought Stress Condition
Author(s):
ZHOU Jiang1; HU Jia-jia2; PEI Zong-ping3; TU Yong-cheng3; KONG Jing3
1．Guiyang Research Academy of Eco-Environmental Sciences,Guiyang,Guizhou 550002；
2.Guizhou Province Environmental Monitoring Center，Guiyang,Guizhou 550001；
3.College of Environmental and Spatial lnformatics，China Mining University，Xuzhou,Jiangsu 221116
Keywords:
drought stress; rock slope; Pyracantha fortuneana; Amorpha fruticosa L.; drought resistance
PACS:
X 171.4
DOI:
-
Abstract:
Taking Pyracantha fortuneana and Amorpha fruticosa L.that are common in the ecological restoration of rocky slopes as the materials,the changes of morphology and physiology under drought stress with pot culture experiments were researched.The results showed that drought stress would make the plant leaf yellowing and wilting on the morphological characteristics under the drought stress,the relative water content and chlorophyll content in leaves of Pyracantha fortuneana,Amorpha fruticosa L.were declined in different degree,the relative water content,relative conductivities,malondialdehyde(MDA) content ,proline content and soluble sugar content showed a rising trend in different degree；at the end of drought stress,the amplitude of variation of the above physiological indexes of Pyracantha fortuneana were -26.7%,-53.28%,+13.2%,22.7%,+22.9%,+352.7% and +1.0%,and these indexes of Amorpha fruticosa L. were -44.3%、-54.8%，+25.3%、+123.6%，+2 327.5% and 399.4%.It said that the effect of drought stress on Pyracantha fortuneanwas less than Amorpha fruticosa L.’s,which illustrated Pyracantha fortuneana was more resistant to drought stress than Amorpha fruticosa L.,and it should cause more attention in rock slope repair plant selection.

References:

[1] 刘仁芙 . 我国土地复垦形势与政策建议 [J]. 中国土地 ,2002(3):31-34.

[2]程勇.江苏省露采矿山岩石边坡生态恢复技术研究[D].南京:南京林业大学,2006.

[3]周跃.植被与侵蚀控制:坡面生态工程基本原理探索[J].应用生态学报,2000,11(2):297-300.

[4]宋庆丰,黄小芸.植被护坡功能分析[J].路基工程,2010(1):104-105.

[5]刘世同,陈志一.公路植草护坡草种及草种组合研究[J].华东公路,1998,110(1):68-71.

[6]王振营,朱敏,王朋.徐州地区石质边坡生态植被恢复工程设计研究[J].山东林业科技,2010(3):92-94.

[7]高俊凤.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2006.

[8]李合生,孙群,赵世杰,等.植物生理生化实验原理与技术[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2000.

[9]邹琦.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2003:161-162.

[10]Liu M H,Pei Z P,Hu J J.Comparative research on drought resistance of four species of herb applied to slope revegetation[C]//Proc.IEEE Symp.2011 International Conference on Electric Technology and Civil Engineering(Volume 4).Lushan,China:IEEE Press,Apr,2011：2996-2999.

[11]陈龙雨,裴宗平.徐州地区岩石边坡生态修复的植物筛选[J].科技信息,2012(1):271,258.

[12]杨帆,苗灵凤,胥晓,等.植物对干旱胁迫的响应研究进展[J].应用与环境生物学报,2007,13(4):586-591.

[13]薛立,曹鹤.逆境下植物叶性状变化的研究进展[J].生态环境学报,2010,19(8):2004-2009.

[14]周江,裴宗平,胡佳佳,等.干旱胁迫下3种岩石边坡生态修复植物的抗旱性[J].干旱区研究,2012,29(3):440-444.

[15]裴宗平,余莉琳,汪云甲,等.4种干旱区生态修复植物的苗期抗旱性研究[J].干旱区资源与环境,2014,28(3):204-208.

[16]涂永成,裴宗平,周江,等.八种抗旱材料组合对干旱矿区油松抗旱性的影响[J].北方园艺,2014(9)：63-66.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2014-12-24