|Table of Contents|

Physiological Response to Shade and Shade-tolerant Capability of Four Species of Ornamental Plants

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2020年06
Page:
76-84
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Physiological Response to Shade and Shade-tolerant Capability of Four Species of Ornamental Plants
Author(s):
GUO Juan1QIU Shuai1WEI Jianfen1CHEN Xuping1QIU Ying1LU Shan2
(1.Hangzhou Landscaping Incorporated,Hangzhou,Zhejiang 310020;2.College of Building Engineering,Zhejiang Sci-Tech University,Hangzhou,Zhejiang 310018)
Keywords:
ornamental plantsshading treatmentphysiological-biochemical indexesshade tolerancecomprehensive evaluation
PACS:
-
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20191743
Abstract:
In order to compare the different adaptive ability of annual seedlings to shading treatments among 4 species of ornamental plants (Camellia hiemalis ‘ShiShi Gashira’,Pileostegia viburnoides,Lysimachia congestiflora Hemsl.,Liriope cymbidiomorpha (Ined)),the research was carried out that different shading treatments (full light,65% shading,80% shading and 95% shading)on the plants growth and physiological and biochemical indicators after 4 months growth,and comprehensive evaluation of membership function value method was used to analyze their shade resistance ability.The results indicated that under 4 shading treatments,the height of Camellia hiemalis ‘ShiShi Gashira’,Liriope cymbidiomorpha (Ined) increased after 4 months,but their crown increased under the shade rate of 65% and 80%,the crown increased firstly and then decreased under full light and 95% shading conditions.The coverage growth condition of Pileostegia viburnoides was the same as above under 4 shading treatments.Lysimachia congestiflora Hemsl.grew well under 4 shading treatments.Along with the rising of the shade degree,the content of chlorophyll,content of chlorophyll a and content of chlorophyll b increased firstly and then decreased,but the content all higer than under full light,while chlorophyll a/b ratio and the content of soluble protein were decreased overall;relative conductivity value of Pileostegia viburnoides decreased firstly and then increased,while the other 3 species of plants showed a increasing trend;the content of MDA of Liriope cymbidiomorpha (Ined)decreased firstly and then increased,while the other 3 species of plants showed a decreasing trend;the activity of POD and SOD of the 3 species of plants increased firstly and then decreased,while the activity of SOD of Pileostegia viburnoides decreased firstly and then increased.Based on comprehensive analysis through membership function,the result showed that,the order of shade tolerance of 4 species of ornamental plants as follow,Liriope cymbidiomorpha (Ined)>Lysimachia congestiflora Hemsl.>Pileostegia viburnoides>Camellia hiemalis ‘ShiShi Gashira’

References:

[1]廖建军,杨喜生,叶勇军.园林绿化树种灰色综合评价与分级选择的研究[J].林业科学研究,2009,22(3):434-438.[2]郝丽红,宋焕芝,于晓南.6个芍药品种的光合生理特性及耐阴性分析[J].西北林学院学报,2016,31(1):31-35.[3]贺彩艳.求米草的耐荫性研究[D].南昌:江西农业大学,2013.[4]邢建丽,郭凌,闫丽君,等.郑州市园林地被植物物种多样性研究[J].河南农业大学学报,2017,51(2):237-242.[5]林田,李天菲,杨华,等.茶梅品种资源的收集保存、鉴定评价及种质创新[J].植物遗传资源学报,2012,13(2):207-211.[6]冯晓琳.蜂斗菜等三种地被植物的耐荫性、耐热性研究[D].临安:浙江农林大学,2016.[7]王雁,马武昌.扶芳藤、紫藤等7种藤本植物光能利用特性及耐荫性比较研究[J].林业科学研究,2004(3):305-309.[8]陈芝.福州市五种园林彩叶植物耐荫性研究及其应用探讨[D].福州:福建农林大学,2010.[9]陆銮眉,阎光宇,杜晓娜,等.8种园林植物耐荫性与光合特性的研究[J].热带作物学报,2011,32(7):1249-1254.[10]陈建勋,王晓峰.植物生理学实验指导[M].2版.广州:华南理工大学出版社,2006.[11]郑炳松.现代植物生理生化研究技术[D].北京:气象出版社,2009:264-365.[12]高俊凤.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2006.[13]曾宪海,安锋,蔡明道,等.高渗胁迫后橡胶树萌发籽苗抗旱性主成分及隶属函数分析[J].中国农学通报,2010,26(1):260-264.[14]原慧芳,陈国云,寸明,等.不同橡胶品种幼苗对遮荫的生理响应及耐荫能力评价[J].西北植物学报,2014,34(3):550-559.[15]胡肖肖,段玉侠,金荷仙,等.4个杜鹃花品种的耐荫性[J].浙江农林大学学报,2018,35(1):88-95.[16]郭玉洁,董彦娜,王琦,等.藿香耐荫性研究[J].河北农业大学学报,2018,41(2):62-66,115.[17]尹慧,安莹,陈雅君,等.不同遮阴强度下白三叶形态特征和生长动态[J].中国草地学报,2015,37(5):86-91.[18]於艳萍.秋枫幼苗耐荫性及光合特性研究[D].南宁:广西大学,2013.[19]林晓锐.哈尔滨市六种地被植物耐荫性及扦插繁殖研究[D].哈尔滨:东北林业大学,2013.[20]腾开琼.樟科三种常绿阔叶树种抗寒生理的研究[D].郑州:河南农业大学,2000.[21]邱帅,卢山,余磊,等.3种垂直绿化基质中园林植物干旱适应性的比较[J].西北植物学报,2017,37(2):286-296.[22]刘卓.不同苜蓿品种耐盐性、抗旱性比较的研究[D].长春:吉林农业大学,2008.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2020-05-24