论文部分内容阅读
本实验分别测定了两个大豆品种在四种不同水分条件下叶片、叶柄和茎中游离脯氨酸浓度的变化。并对大豆在开花期、结英期以及鼓粒期体内脯氨酸的变化动态进行了研究。结果表明:在正常供水条件下,从开花期到鼓粒期随着生育期的进展,两个大豆品种叶片、叶柄和茎中的脯氨酸浓度均保持着增长趋势,并且脯氨酸浓度在各生育期都是按叶片、叶柄、茎而依次降低。正常供水条件下,抗旱性较强的“7605”各测定部位的脯氨酸浓度在各生育期均高于抗旱性较弱的“鲁豆四号”。“鲁豆四号”体内的脯氨酸对水分胁迫的反应要比“7605”敏感得多,而且在水分胁迫下脯氨酸累积能力明显高于“7605”。两个大豆品种体内脯氨酸对水分胁迫的反应因部位不同、生育期不同以及胁迫程度不同而不同。我们认为脯氨酸不能作为大豆抗旱性的有效指标。
In this experiment, the changes of free proline concentration in leaves, petioles and stems of two soybean cultivars under four different water conditions were measured. The dynamic changes of proline in soybean during flowering, engulfing and drumming stage were also studied. The results showed that under normal conditions of water supply, the proline concentrations in leaves, petioles and stems of both soybean cultivars maintained a trend of increasing with the growth period from anthesis stage to drum stage, Each growth period is by blade, petiole, stem and in turn reduce. Under normal conditions of water supply, the proline concentrations of the “7605” test sites with higher drought resistance were all higher than those of “Lu Dou No.4” with low drought resistance at all growth stages. The proline in the “Lu Dou No.4” was more sensitive to water stress than “7605”, and its proline accumulation ability under water stress was significantly higher than “7605”. The responses of proline to water stress in two soybean cultivars were different due to different sites, different growth periods and the degree of stress. We think proline can not be used as a valid indicator of soybean drought resistance.