|Table of Contents|

Analysis on Dynamic Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Leaf Water Potential of Seven Landscape Tree Species in Beijing

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2022年07
Page:
75-82
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Analysis on Dynamic Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Leaf Water Potential of Seven Landscape Tree Species in Beijing
Author(s):
LIU Shiying1; 2; LU Shaowei1; 2; LI Shaoning1; 2; XU Xiaotian2; SUN Zhiyu1; ZHAO Na2
(1.College of Forestry,Shenyang Agricultural University，Shenyang,Liaoning 110866；2.Institute of Forestry and Pomology，Beijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences/Beijing Yanshan Forest Ecosystem Positioning Observation and Research Station，Beijing 100093)
Keywords:
landscape tree species; leaf water potential; dynamic characteristic; meteorological factor; dominant factor
PACS:
-
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20214121
Abstract:
Seven common landscape tree species of Pinus bungeana，Platycladus orientalis，Sabina chinensis，Sabina vulgaris, Ginkgo biloba，Koelreuteria paniculata，and Sophora japonica were used as experimental materials to study the dynamic characteristics and influencing factors of leaf water potential of seven landscape tree species by pot control method，in order to clarify the water deficit status and drought resistance mechanisms of plants and provide reference for the selection of landscape tree species in Beijing.The results showed that under good water supply treatment，the diurnal variations in leaf water potential of S.chinensis，P.bungeana，S.vulgaris，P.orientalis，G.biloba，and S.japonica all presented a trend of high in the morning and evening，and low at noon.There was a very significant difference in the diurnal variation trend of K.paniculata and other tree species (P<0.01).Its leaf water potential rose briefly from 12：00 to 14：00，and then increased again with time.The daily variation of leaf water potential of evergreen tree species was significantly lower than that of deciduous tree species (P<0.05).The monthly change in leaf water potential of each experimental tree species from July to October showed a gradual upward trend.The leaf water potential with sufficient soil water content was significantly negatively correlated with solar radiation and atmospheric temperature (P<0.01)，and positively correlated with atmospheric relative humidity (P<0.01).There was no significant difference in the degree of influence of solar radiation on leaf water potential between different tree species.The impacts of atmospheric temperature on the leaf water potential of S.japonica and P.bungeanais were stronger than that of other tree species.P.orientalis，G.biloba and K.paniculata were more susceptible to atmospheric relative humidity than other tree species.The main meteorological factor that affected the changes in leaf water potential of S.chinensis, P.orientalis，and S.japonica was atmospheric relative humidity，while the atmospheric temperature was the dominant meteorological factor functioning leaf water potential of P.bungeana，S.vulgaris，G.biloba，and K.paniculata.

References:

[1]KHAJEDDIN S,MATINKHAH S,JAFARI Z.A drought resistance index to select drought resistant plant species based on leaf water potential measurements[J].Journal of Arid Land,2019,11(4):623-635.[2]罗丹丹,王传宽,金鹰.植物应对干旱胁迫的气孔调节[J].应用生态学报,2019,30(12):4333-4343.[3]XUE F L,LIU W L,CAO H L,et al.Stomatal conductance of tomato leaves is regulated by both ABA and leaf water potential under combined water and salt stress[J].Physiologia Plantarum,2021,172(4):2070-2078.[4]MORTE A,LOVISOLO C,SCHUBERT A.Effect of drought stress on growth and water relations of the mycorrhizal association Helianthemum almeriense-Terfezia claveryi[J].Mycorrhiza,2000,10(3):115-119.[5]李吉跃,翟洪波,刘晓燕.树木水力结构特征的昼夜变化规律[J].北京林业大学学报,2002,24(4):39-44.[6]KLEPPER B.Diurnal pattern of water potential in woody plants[J].Plant Physiology,1968,43:1931-1934.[7]RUIZ-SNCHEZ M C,DOMINGO R,PREZ-PASTOR A.Daily variations in water relations of apricot trees under different irrigation regimes[J].Biologia Plantarum,2007,51(4):735-740.[8]尹立河,黄金廷,王晓勇,等.毛乌素沙地4种植物叶水势变化及其影响因素分析[J].植物资源与环境学报,2016,25(1):17-23.[9]韩磊,贺康宁,芦新建,等.青海高寒半干旱区蒙古莸叶水势变化及其与环境因素的关系[J].水土保持通报,2008(6):1-5.[10]罗丹丹,王传宽,金鹰.植物水分调节对策:等水与非等水行为[J].植物生态学报,2017,41(9):1020-1032.[11]张宝鑫,张治明,李延明.北京地区园林树种选择和应用研究[J].中国园林,2009(4):94-98.[12]张国静,杨伟强.北京地区主要行道树树种适应性评价及病虫害防治[J].中国城市林业,2012(3):47-50.[13]WANG H F,MACGREGOR-FORS I,LPEZ-PUJOL J.Warm-temperate，immense，and sprawling:Plant diversity drivers in urban Beijing，China[J].Plant Ecology,2012,213(6):967-992.[14]段爱国,张建国,张俊佩,等.金沙江干热河谷主要植被恢复树种叶水势的时空变化规律[J].林业科学研究,2007,20(2):151-159.[15]刘娟娟,李吉跃,王继强.北京城市绿化树种的水力结构特征[J].北京林业大学学报,2006(S1):38-46.[16]刘晓燕,李吉跃,翟洪波,等.从树木水力结构特征探讨植物耐旱性[J].北京林业大学学报,2003,25(3):48-54.[17]杨启良,张富仓,刘小刚,等.植物水分传输过程中的调控机制研究进展[J].生态学报,2011,31(15):4427-4436.[18]LUAN S.Signalling drought in guard cells[J].Plant，Cell & Environment,2002,25(2):229-237.[19]李小琴,张小由,刘晓晴,等.额济纳绿洲河岸胡杨(Populus euphratica)叶水势变化特征[J].中国沙漠,2014,34(3):712-717.[20]刘晓燕,李吉跃,翟洪波.10种木本植物水力结构特征春季变化规律[J].北京林业大学学报,2004(1):35-40.[21]谭雪红.5种灌木的生理特性及抗旱性的综合评价[J].东北林业大学学报,2013,41(2):29-34.[22]SOMERVILLE C,YOUNGS H,TAYLOR C,et al.Feedstocks for lignocellulosic biofuels[J].Science,2010,329:790-792.[23]赵娜,李少宁,徐晓天,等.北京地区典型绿化树种水分利用效率及其影响因素[J].北京林业大学学报,2021,43(3):44-54.[24]王丁,姚健,薛建辉,等.6种喀斯特造林树种苗木叶片水势变化及影响因子研究[J].中国农学通报,2010(22):109-116.[25]韩磊.黄土半干旱区主要造林树种蒸腾耗水及冠层蒸腾模拟研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2011.[26]付爱红,陈亚宁,李卫红.极端干旱区旱生芦苇叶水势变化及其影响因子研究[J].草业学报,2012,21(3):163-170.[27]徐军亮,马履一,王华田.油松人工林SPAC水势梯度的时空变异[J].北京林业大学学报,2003(5):5-9.[28]田丽,王进鑫,庞云龙.不同供水条件下气象因素对侧柏和刺槐叶水势的影响[J].西北林学院学报,2008(3):30-33.[29]魏晓霞,呼和牧仁,周梅,等.不同年龄华北落叶松叶水势及其影响因素的研究[J].干旱区资源与环境,2010,24(7):144-148.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2022-06-07