Photosynthetic Characteristics of Rice Under Drip Irrigation with Plastic Film Mulching and Continuous Flooding

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7216.2015.02.006

Abstract

Abstract:

Photosynthetic pigments contents,photosynthetic characteristics,chlorophyll fluorescence parameters, osmolytes,and water use efficiency(WUE) and yield factors at milky stage of two rice lines T-04 and T-43(Oryza sativa subsp. keng) were analyzed under traditional continuous flooding and drip irrigation with plastic film mulching in a pot experiment. The results showed that the WUE of rice under drip irrigation with plastic film mulching were higher than that under traditional flooding, but chlorophyll a,chlorophyll b and carotenoids contents were significantly reduced compared with those under traditional continuous flooding.The maximum leaf net photosynthetic rate,relatively high intercellular CO₂ concentration(C_i) and an equivalent stomatal conductance(G_S),transpiration rate(T_r) were significantly lower than those under continuous flooding, indicating that the reduced photosynthetic rate was attributed to both chlorophyll contents and stoma.Apparent quantum efficiency(AQY), carboxylation efficiency(CE), Φ_PSⅡ,electron transport rate (ETR) and F_v/F_m decreased significantly (P<0.05). Lower photosynthetic pigments contents might be the main factor to low leaf photosynthetic rate which directly leads to 1ower light-harvesting capacity and photochemical conversion efficiencies of the PSⅡ reaction center. The contents of soluble sugars(SS) and soluble proteins(SP) were lower, but both proline (Pro) and malondialdehyde(MDA) contents were higher than those under continuous flooding cultivation,implicating that drip irrigation with plastic film mulching resulted in membrane lipid peroxidation,and cell membrane damage to some degree, but activated osmolytes accumulation thus enhanced its drought tolerance. Effective panicle number per unit area and seed setting rate under drip irrigation with plastic film mulching were significantly reduced,leading to a declined seed production.

Key words: drip irrigation, plastic film mulching, flooding cultivation, photosynthetic characteristics, osmorgulation, rice

摘要：

以粳稻品系T-04和T-43为试材,通过盆栽控水试验,比较了在膜下滴灌和淹灌两种栽培模式下乳熟期叶片的光合色素含量、光合特性、叶绿素荧光参数和渗透调节物质含量的差异,分析了两种栽培模式下的水分利用效率和产量构成因素。结果表明,在膜下滴灌栽培模式下,2个水稻品系的水分利用效率显著高于淹灌,叶绿素a、叶绿素b、类胡萝卜素含量均降低;最大净光合速率、胞间CO₂浓度、气孔导度、蒸腾速率显著降低,表明光合速率下降受叶绿素含量和气孔的双重影响;表观量子效率、羧化效率、Φ_PSII、电子传递速率、F_v/F_m均显著降低,说明光合色素含量降低导致PSⅡ反应中心捕光能力减弱和光化学转化效率降低,从而使叶片光合速率降低;可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白均显著低于淹灌栽培;丙二醛、脯氨酸含量高于淹灌栽培,说明滴灌栽培水稻植株的膜脂过氧化加剧,细胞膜系统受到一定程度的破坏,通过主动积累渗透调节物质,适应干旱胁迫。膜下滴灌栽培水稻单位面积有效穗数和结实率显著降低,导致最终减产。

关键词: 膜下滴灌, 传统淹灌, 光合特性, 渗透调节, 水稻

CLC Number:

Zhi-jun WANG, Zong-ming XIE, You-sheng TIAN, Lin CHEN, Yong-mei DONG, You-zhong LI, Zhao-zhi LV. Photosynthetic Characteristics of Rice Under Drip Irrigation with Plastic Film Mulching and Continuous Flooding[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2015, 29(2): 150-158.

王志军, 谢宗铭, 田又升, 陈林, 董永梅, 李有忠, 吕昭智. 膜下滴灌和淹灌两种栽培模式下水稻光合生理特性的研究[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2015, 29(2): 150-158.

Figures/Tables 9

References 33

[1]	Belder P, Bouman B A M, Cabangon R, et al. Effect of water-saving irrigation on rice yield and water use in typical lowand conditions in Asia.Agric Water Manag, 2004, 65: 193-210.
[2]	徐俊增, 彭世彰, 魏征, 等. 不同供氮水平及水分调控条件下水稻光合作用光响应特征.农业工程学报, 2012, 28(2): 71-77.
[3]	程旺大, 张国平, 赵国平, 等. 嘉早935水稻覆膜旱栽的物质积累及运转研究.作物学报, 2003, 29(3): 413-418.
[4]	邓环, 曹凑贵, 程建平, 等. 不同灌溉方式对水稻生物学特性的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2008, 16(3): 602-606.
[5]	邹桂花, 梅捍卫, 余新桥, 等. 不同灌水量对水、旱稻营养生长和光合特性及其产量的影响.作物学报, 2006, 32(8): 1179-1183.
[6]	郭庆人, 陈林. 水稻膜下滴灌栽培技术在我国发展的优势及前景分析. 中国稻米, 2012, 18(4): 36-39.
[7]	He H B, Ma F Y, Yang R, et al.Rice performance and water use efficiency under plastic mulching with drip irrigation.Plos One, 2013, 8: 1-15.
[8]	朱齐超,危常州,李美宁,等. 氮肥运筹对膜下滴灌水稻生长和产量的影响,中国水稻科学,2013,27(4):440-446.
[9]	陈学庚,康建明. 水稻膜下滴灌种植与播种机的研究开发. 农机化研究, 2013(3): 74-79.
[10]	陈林,程莲,李丽,等. 水稻膜下滴灌技术的增产效果与经济效益分析.中国稻米,2013,19(1):41-4.
[11]	陈林,郭庆人.膜下滴灌水稻栽培技术的形成与发展. 2012,26(5):587-588.
[12]	陈林,王芬. 水稻光合特性研究综述.高原山地气象研究,2010,30(4):89-92.
[13]	周可金,肖文娜,官春云. 不同油菜品种角果光合特性及叶绿素荧光参数的差异.中国油料作物学报,2009,31(3):316-321.
[14]	凌启鸿. 作物群体质量. 上海:上海科学技术出版社,2000.
[15]	高俊风. 植物生理实验指导. 北京:高等教育出版社.2006.
[16]	Thomley J H M.Mathematical models in plannt physiology.London:Academic Press,1976.
[17]	Baly E C C. The kinetics of photosynthesis. London:Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B(Biological Sciences),1935.
[18]	Krause G H,Weis E.Chlorophyll fluorescence and photosynthesis:The basis.Annu Rev Plant physiol Plant Mol Biol,1991,42:313-349.
[19]	Van K, Snel J F H. The use of chlorophyll fluorescence nomenclature in plant stress physiology.Photo-synth Res,1990,25:147-150.
[20]	张明生,谢波,谈锋,等. 甘薯可溶性蛋白、叶绿素及ATP含量变化与品种抗旱性关系的研究.中国农业科学,2003,36(1):13-16.
[21]	孙小玲,许岳飞,马鲁沂,等. 植株叶片的光合色素构成对遮阴的响应.植物生态学报,2010,34(8):989-999.
[22]	董志新,韩清芳,贾志宽,等. 不同苜蓿品种光合速率对光和CO2浓度的响应特征.生态学报,2007,27(6):2272-2277.
[23]	杜伟莉,高杰,胡富亮,等. 玉米叶片光合作用和渗透调节对干旱胁迫的响应.作物学报,2013,39(3):530-536.
[24]	Pieters A J,Souki S E.Effects drought during grain filling on PS II activity in rice.J Plant Physiol,2005,162:903-911.
[25]	赵丽英,邓西平,山仑. 不同水分处理下冬小麦旗叶叶绿素荧光参数的变化研究.中国生态农业学报,2007,15(1):63-66.
[26]	Morgan J M,Osmoregulation and water stress in higher plants.Ann Rev plant pgysiol,1984,35:299-319.
[27]	Cabuslay G S,Ito O,Alejar A A.Physiological evaluation of responses of rice to water deficit.Plant Sci,2002,163:815-827.
[28]	Martino C D,Delfine S,Pizzuto R,et al.Free amino acids and glycine betaine in leaf osmoregulation of spinach responding to increasing salt stress.New Phytol,2003,158: 455-463.
[29]	Chaves M M,Oliveira M M.Mechanisms underlying plant resilience to water deficits:Prospects for water-saving agriculture.J Exper Bot,2004,55:2365-2384.
[30]	蔡昆争,吴学祝,骆世明. 不同生育期水分胁迫对水稻根叶渗透调节物质变化的影响.植物生态学报,2008,32(2):491-500.
[31]	张荣萍,马均,王贺正,等. 不同灌水方式对水稻生育特性及水分利用率的影响.中国农学通报,2005,21(9):144-150.
[32]	蔡永萍,杨其光,黄义德. 水稻水作与旱作对抽穗后剑叶光合特性、衰老及根系活性的影响.中国水稻科学,2000,14(4):219-224.
[33]	倪同坤,戴柏元,王卫军,等. 水稻控制灌溉技术在苏北沿海垦区的应用.江苏农业科学,2008,3:52-54.

材料 Material	栽培方式 Cultivation	叶绿素a含量 Chlorophyll a content /(mg·g^-1)	叶绿素b含量 Chlorophyll b content /(mg·g^-1)	总叶绿素含量 Total Chlorophyll contents /(mg·g^-1)	类胡萝卜素含量 Carotenoids contents /(mg·g^-1)	叶绿素a/b Chlorophyll a/b	类胡萝卜素/ 叶绿素 Carotenoids/ chlorophyll
T-04	传统淹灌TCF	1.09±0.08 a	0.37±0.03 a	1.46±0.11 a	0.21±0.014 a	2.96±0.24 a	0.15±0.001 a
	膜下滴灌DIPFM	0.85±0.04 b	0.31±0.02 b	1.15±0.05 b	0.11±0.004 b	2.77±0.39 c	0.13±0.003 b
T-43	传统淹灌TCF	1.14±0.00 a	0.40±0.01 a	1.54±0.03 a	0.21±0.006 a	2.89±0.16 b	0.14±0.002 b
	膜下滴灌DIPFM	1.11±0.04 a	0.40±0.01 a	1.51±0.04 a	0.21±0.006 a	2.77±0.41 c	0.14±0.001 b

材料 Material	栽培方式 Cultivation	叶绿素a含量 Chlorophyll a content /(mg·g^-1)	叶绿素b含量 Chlorophyll b content /(mg·g^-1)	总叶绿素含量 Total Chlorophyll contents /(mg·g^-1)	类胡萝卜素含量 Carotenoids contents /(mg·g^-1)	叶绿素a/b Chlorophyll a/b	类胡萝卜素/ 叶绿素 Carotenoids/ chlorophyll
T-04	传统淹灌TCF	1.09±0.08 a	0.37±0.03 a	1.46±0.11 a	0.21±0.014 a	2.96±0.24 a	0.15±0.001 a
	膜下滴灌DIPFM	0.85±0.04 b	0.31±0.02 b	1.15±0.05 b	0.11±0.004 b	2.77±0.39 c	0.13±0.003 b
T-43	传统淹灌TCF	1.14±0.00 a	0.40±0.01 a	1.54±0.03 a	0.21±0.006 a	2.89±0.16 b	0.14±0.002 b
	膜下滴灌DIPFM	1.11±0.04 a	0.40±0.01 a	1.51±0.04 a	0.21±0.006 a	2.77±0.41 c	0.14±0.001 b

材料 Material	栽培方式 Cultivation	蒸腾速率 Transpiration rate(T_r) /(mmol·m^-2s^-1)	气孔导度 Stomatal conductance(G_s) /(μmol·m^-2s^-1)	光合速率 Photosynthetic rate(P_n) /(μmol·m^-2s^-1)	胞间CO₂浓度 Intercellular CO₂ concentration(C_i) /(μmol·mol^-1)	水分利用效率 Water use efficiency(WUE) μmol/mmol
T-04	传统淹灌TCF	17.79±2.26 a	451.96±63.38 a	21.18±2.86 a	258.92±13.56 a	1.19±0.05 b
	膜下滴灌DIPFM	8.72±1.28 b	211.70±42.95 b	14.48±2.92 c	241.19±18.08 b	1.66±0.06 a
T-43	传统淹灌TCF	17.31±1.77 a	387.92±58.31 a	20.95±4.40 ab	248.34±7.79 ab	1.21±0.03 b
	膜下滴灌DIPFM	10.50±1.41 b	244.51±41.04 b	16.51±3.27 bc	232.85±5.98 b	1.57±0.08 a

材料 Material	栽培方式 Cultivation	蒸腾速率 Transpiration rate(T_r) /(mmol·m^-2s^-1)	气孔导度 Stomatal conductance(G_s) /(μmol·m^-2s^-1)	光合速率 Photosynthetic rate(P_n) /(μmol·m^-2s^-1)	胞间CO₂浓度 Intercellular CO₂ concentration(C_i) /(μmol·mol^-1)	水分利用效率 Water use efficiency(WUE) μmol/mmol
T-04	传统淹灌TCF	17.79±2.26 a	451.96±63.38 a	21.18±2.86 a	258.92±13.56 a	1.19±0.05 b
	膜下滴灌DIPFM	8.72±1.28 b	211.70±42.95 b	14.48±2.92 c	241.19±18.08 b	1.66±0.06 a
T-43	传统淹灌TCF	17.31±1.77 a	387.92±58.31 a	20.95±4.40 ab	248.34±7.79 ab	1.21±0.03 b
	膜下滴灌DIPFM	10.50±1.41 b	244.51±41.04 b	16.51±3.27 bc	232.85±5.98 b	1.57±0.08 a

材料 Material	栽培方式 Cultivation	最大净光合速率 Maximum net photosynthetic rate /(μmol·m^-2s^-1)	暗呼吸速率 Respiration rate /(μmol·m^-2s^-1)	光补偿点 Light compensation point /(μmol·m^-2s^-1)	光饱和点 Light saturation point /(μmol·m^-2s^-1)	表观量子效 Apparent quantum efficiency	决定系数 Determination coefficient
T-04	传统淹灌TCF	18.92 b	-0.132 b	4.00 b	733 b	0.044 b	0.939
	膜下滴灌DIPFM	13.81 d	-1.402 a	6.75 a	644 d	0.041 c	0.914
T-43	传统淹灌TCF	21.23 a	-0.075 b	2.40 c	690 c	0.048 a	0.929
	膜下滴灌DIPFM	17.40 c	-0.033 b	1.43 d	757 a	0.016 d	0.896