|Table of Contents|

Analysis of Leaf Structure Differences and Relationships Between the Anatomical Structure and Drought Resistances of Three Plums Cultivars

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2021年15
Page:
27-34
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Analysis of Leaf Structure Differences and Relationships Between the Anatomical Structure and Drought Resistances of Three Plums Cultivars
Author(s):
JING Chenjuan; CHEN Xuefeng; WANG Duan; JI Wenzhang; WU Xiaohong
(Shijiazhuang Fruit Research Institute,Hebei Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences,Shijiazhuang,Hebei 050061)
Keywords:
plum; leaf; spongy tissue; drought resistances
PACS:
-
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20205324
Abstract:
Three plum cultivars of ‘Longyuanmili’‘Heibaoshi’ ‘Dashizaosheng’ were used as test materials.The leaf morphology and anatomical structure of old and young leaves were observed by paraffin section and scanning electron microscope,and the drought resistance of different varieties was compared by membership function method in this experiment.In order to provide a rich data base for morphological and anatomical identification for the evaluation method of plum germplasm resources,and also provided a reference for drought-resistant seed selection of plum.The results showed that the leaf area of ‘Longyuanmili’ was the largest,(52.93±3.95)cm2,its leaf shape was slightly round (ratio of length and width was 1.73±0.14).The leaf thickness and weight of ‘Heibaoshi’ was the maximum,they were (3.16±0.56)mm·(10leaves)-1 and (0.66±0.05)g,respectively,its leaf shape was slightly long (ratio of length and width was 2.50±0.13).The leaf thickness and width of the upper epidermis could be distinguished between young and old leaves of the three plum cultivars,the leaf thickness and the width of the upper epidermis of young leaves were the minimum,while the index of old leaves were maximum.The upper epidermal cell width and leaf tissue structure tightness (CTR) of young leaves was ‘Heibaoshi’<‘Longyuanmili’<‘Dashizaosheng’.The membership function was used to make comprehensive analysis of the epidermal cell structure,palisade tissue,stomatal size and density of the plum leaf tissue,the result was that the cultivar of the strongest drought resistance was ‘Dashizaosheng’ (young leaves was 0.580 3;old leaves was 0.850 8),and the weakest plum cultivar was ‘Longyuanmili’ (young leaves was 0.324 5;old leaves was 0.379 7).

References:

[1]李鑫,刘威生,杨建民,等.李营养累积、分布及叶片养分动态研究[J].土壤,2007(6):982-986.[2]韩国辉,罗友进,党江波,等.果桑50个品种的叶片和果实性状及倍性鉴定评价[C].青岛：中国园艺学会2018年学术年会,2018.[3]李润唐,张映南,田大伦.柑橘类植物叶片的气孔研究[J].果树学报,2004,21(5):419-424.[4]郭燕,张树航,颖李,等.中国板栗238份品种（系）叶片形态、解剖结构及其抗旱性评价[J].园艺学报,2020,47(6):1033-1046.[5]王琴,冯晶红,黄奕,等.武汉市15种阔叶乔木滞尘能力与叶表微形态特征[J].生态学报,2020,40(1):217-226.[6]魏潇,章秋平,刘威生.中国李种质资源研究进展[J].园艺学报,2020,47(6):1203-1212.[7]范志霞,陈越悦,付荷玲.成都地区10种园林灌木叶片结构与抗旱性关系研究[J].植物科学学报,2019,37(1):70-78.[8]刘育梅,宋志瑜,池敏杰,等.5种山榄科果树叶片组织结构与耐盐性的相关性[J].厦门大学学报(自然版),2017,56(2):300-304.[9]高小丽,高金锋,冯佰利,等.不同绿豆品种的叶片解剖结构[J].作物学报,2012,38(1):181-185.[10]杨艳华，王才林.不同水稻品种叶片显微结构和超微结构的比较研究[J].植物研究,2010,30(2):152-156.[11]周静波,俞斐,沈显生.满江红叶片形态特征的环境扫描电子显微镜活体观察[J].电子显微学报,2009(5):448-452.[12]王雨,王舰,吴问其,等.扫描电镜下的小麦叶毛性状与麦长管蚜生物学参数相关性分析[J].植物保护学报,2014,41(4):475-481.[13]王泽华,伟秦,闫娟娟,等.不同生境新疆野苹果叶片解剖结构及其与抗寒性的关系[J].经济林研究,2016,34(3):163-168.[14]宋恬,朱敏,颉刚刚,等.新疆野生欧洲李叶片形态及结构研究[J].园艺学报,2015,42(S1):2596.[15]崔国文,马春平.紫花苜蓿叶片形态结构及其与抗寒性的关系[J].草地学报,2007,15(1):70-75.[16]刘倩文,邱安然,谢翔,等.5种草莓叶片解剖结构与抗旱性的关系[J].天津农业科学,2019,25(7):22-26.[17]赖寒健,葛照硕,李小兵,等.微观结构和蜡质对植物叶表面疏水性能的影响[J].林业科学,2017,53(4):74-82.[18]杨林先,姜云天,曲柏宏.苹果梨和山梨的叶片组织结构研究[J].湖南农业科学,2010(1):107-108，112.[19]李伟,符喆,郝晓哲,等.温室内赤苞花和黄虾花叶片解剖结构及光合特性研究[J].中国农学通报,2020,36(12):58-61.[20]邱庆树,鲁蓉蓉,张吉民,等.花生叶片气孔突变及其与抗旱性的关系[J].山东农业科学,1983(3):13-15.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2021-11-20