|Table of Contents|

Evaluation of Cold Resistance in 22 Phalaenopsis Varieties Under Natural Low Temperature

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2024年23
Page:
58-65
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Evaluation of Cold Resistance in 22 Phalaenopsis Varieties Under Natural Low Temperature
Author(s):
XIE Zhenxing1; LIU Guomin2; LU Zuzheng1; HUANG Xinyi1; QIN Qian1; LUO Qing1
(1.Guangxi Subtropical Crops Research Institute/Key Laboratory of Quality and Safety Control for Subtropical Fruit and Vegetable，Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs，Nanning，Guangxi 530001；2.Cash Crops Research Institute，Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences，Nanning，Guangxi 530007)
Keywords:
Phalaenopsis; cold resistance; principal component analysis; subordinate function analysis; cluster analysis
PACS:
S 682.31
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20241512
Abstract:
Taking 22 introduced Phalaenopsis varieties as the test materials，principal component analysis，subordinate function analysis and cluster analysis were used to study the changes of nine physiological indicators of cold resistance in different Phalaenopsis after natural low temperature stress，including relative electric conductivity (REC)，malondialdehyde (MDA)，catalase (CAT)，superoxide dismutase (SOD)，peroxidase (POD)，soluble protein (SP)，soluble sugar (SS)，proline (Pro) and phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase (PEPC)，in order to provide reference for the mining of cold-resistant germplasm resources and evaluation of cold resistance in Phalaenopsis.The results showed that eight indicators of MDA，CAT，SOD，POD，SP，SS，Pro and PEPC showed significant differences among the 22 Phalaenopsis varieties.Principal component analysis found that the cumulative contribution rate of the first four principal components was 73.706%，explaining most of the information of cold resistance indicators.Cluster analysis based on the comprehensive cold resistance ability D value could divide the 22 Phalaenopsis varieties into five categories.Among them，the strongest cold-resistant varieties were Phalaenopsis mannii，lobbi，and schilleriana，while the weakest cold-resistant varieties were Phalaenopsis ‘lanxing’‘zizuan’，and ‘xiangfei’.

References:

［1］王世尧，杨书才，蒋栓丽，等．蝴蝶兰响应低温胁迫研究进展［J］．北方园艺，2023(4)：124-131.［2］董飞，马蕾，张冀华，等．不同苗龄蝴蝶兰形态指标与开花性状的相关性研究［J］．北方园艺，2024(3)：58-62.［3］赵玉安，王世尧，张果，等．蝴蝶兰种质资源生物学性状综合评价［J］．北方园艺，2024(1)：54-59.［4］黄歆怡，谢振兴，陆祖正，等．罗氏蝴蝶兰的无菌播种与快速繁殖［J］．植物生理学报，2020，56(4)：693-699.［5］高壮壮，娄倩，刘雅莉．蝴蝶兰‘大辣椒’组培快繁技术体系的优化［J］．西北林学院学报，2020，35(4)：95-100，211.［6］刘学庆，王秀峰，朴永吉．蝴蝶兰不同品种耐冷特性的研究［J］．园艺学报，2007，34(2)：425-430.［7］冯小璐，孔艳娥，孙音，等．不同品种蝴蝶兰耐冷性评价［J］．中国农学通报，2022，38(1)：59-67.［8］刘国敏，谢振兴，覃维治，等．不同砧穗组合嫁接对马铃薯抗寒性的影响［J］．黑龙江农业科学，2023(2)：11-16.［9］沈静，杜若曦，魏婷，等．干制方式对鲜食枣脆片香气品质的影响［J］．食品科学，2017，38(18)：131-137.［10］牟开萍，李维芳，杨文新，等.20个月季品种的抗寒性综合评价［J］．草原与草坪，2021，41(6)：58-66.［11］NADARAJAH K K．ROS homeostasis in abiotic stress tolerance in plants［J］．International Journal of Molecular Sciences，2020，21(15)：5208.［12］HE S，ZHAO K，MA L，et al．Comparison of cold resistance physiological and biochemical features of four Herba Rhodiola seedlings under low temperature［J］．Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences，2016，23(2)：198-204.［13］李轶冰，杨顺强，任广鑫，等．低温处理下不同禾本科牧草的生理变化及其抗寒性比较［J］．生态学报，2009，29(3)：1341-1347.［14］郝平安，梁芳，张燕，等．低温胁迫对蝴蝶兰光合及生理特性的影响［J］．热带作物学报，2018，39(10)：1955-1962.［15］MURAMATSU M，SUZUKI R，YAMAZAKI T，et al．Comparison of plant-type phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylases from rice：Identification of two plant-specific regulatory regions of the allosteric enzyme［J］．Plant & Cell Physiology，2015，56(3)：468-480.［16］魏绍巍，黎茵．植物磷酸烯醇式丙酮酸羧化酶的功能及其在基因工程中的应用［J］．生物工程学报，2011，27(12)：1702-1710.［17］BANDYOPADHYAY A，DATTA K，ZHANG J，et al．Enhanced photosynthesis rate in genetically engineered indica rice expressing pepc gene cloned from maize［J］．Plant Science，2007，172(6)：1204-1209.［18］GONZLEZ M C，SNCHEZ R，CEJUDO F J．Abiotic stresses affecting water balance induce phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase expression in roots of wheat seedlings［J］．Planta，2003，216(6)：985-992.［19］SANCHEZ R，FLORES A，CEJUDO F J．Arabidopsis phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase genes encode immunologically unrelated polypeptides and are differentially expressed in response to drought and salt stress［J］．Planta，2006，223(5)：901-909.［20］GARCIA-MAURIO S，MONREAL J A，ALVAREZ R，et al．Characterization of salt stress-enhanced phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase kinase activity in leaves of Sorghum vulgare：Independence from osmotic stress，involvement of ion toxicity and significance of dark phosphorylation［J］．Planta，2003，216(4)：648-655.［21］张赞培，谷月营，尚旭岚，等．自然低温下23个青钱柳家系耐寒性评价［J］．南京林业大学学报(自然科学版)，2024，48(4)：85-92.［22］海光辉，张正武，王茜，等．不同海拔油橄榄对自然低温的生理响应及抗寒性差异［J］．经济林研究，2022，40(4)：182-190，217.［23］谢婉莹，祁银燕，刘小利，等．青海九个核桃新品种引种的抗寒性［J］．北方园艺，2023(12)：29-36.［24］王敏，李莉，贾蓉，等.10种紫花苜蓿在低温胁迫下的生理特性及耐寒性评价［J］．草业学报，2024，33(6)：76-88.［25］刘慧民，仉茜，苏青，等.18种绣线菊苗期抗寒性评价与筛选［J］．园艺学报，2014，41(12)：2427-2436.［26］冯峻，马焕成，罗正平，等．低温胁迫下华山松不同无性系幼苗抗寒性评价［J］．四川农业大学学报，2024，42(2)：378-387，447.［27］丁思悦，王雨婷，赵佳琪，等．葡萄种质抗寒性鉴定及综合评价［J］．西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版)，2024，52(6)：106-120.［28］张晓婷，庄赟，董嘉辉，等．荔枝种质资源抗寒性综合评价［J］．果树学报，2024，41(3)：403-425.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2024-12-16