期刊文献+

小麦的铝毒及耐性 被引量:16

Aluminum toxicity and tolerance of wheat
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 为探明Al的毒性和忍耐机理 ,比较了Scout 6 6和Atlas 6 6Al敏感和抗性的 2个小麦品种的根对Al的积累模式、根细胞壁对Al的吸附以及Al诱导的有机酸的分泌。结果表明 ,Al对Scout 6 6根伸长的抑制作用较Atlas 6 6明显。根系吸收的Al主要积累于 0至 5mm根尖处。Scout 6 6的根尖及Al处理后分离的根尖细胞壁对Al的积累量大于Atlas 6 6。但是 ,Al处理前分离根尖细胞壁 ,Al处理后细胞壁对Al的吸附量两品种间无显著差异。Al可诱导Atlas 6 6的根系分泌苹果酸 ,而Scout 6 6的分泌物中未发现Al诱导的有机酸。这些结果表明 ,Atlas 6 6的根尖及其细胞壁较Scout 6 6积累较少的Al,这种差异与Al诱导的有机酸分泌有关 。 To elucidate aluminum (Al) toxicity and Al-tolerant mechanism, the pattern of Al-accumulation in roots of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), absorption of Al to cell walls and Al-induced secretion of organic acids from roots were compared in Al-tolerant cultivar, Atlas 66, and Al-sensitive cultivar, Scout 66, of wheat. After exposed the roots to Al solution, more inhibition of root elongation was found in Scout 66. Al was mainly accumulated in the terminal 0 to 5 cm of roots. Scout 66 accumulated more Al in root apices and cell wall separated from root apices after Al treatment. However, after Al treatment difference in Al absorption to the cell walls separated from root apices before Al treatment between the cultivars was not found. In other hand, Al-induced malate acid was found in root exudates of Atlas 66, while no organic acid was found in that of Scout 66. These results indicated that less Al was accumulated in the roots of Atlas 66 than that of Scout 66. This difference seems related to the Al-induced secretion of organic acids from roots, but not to the capacity of cell walls itself to Al-accumulation.
机构地区 广西大学农学院
出处 《植物营养与肥料学报》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2002年第3期325-329,共5页 Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers
基金 国家教育部留学回国人员科研起动资金项目 ( 2 0 0 1[345 ] ) 国家 973项目 ( 2 0 0 1CB -10 890 5 )资助
关键词 小麦 铝毒 耐性 wheat Al toxicity tolerance
  • 相关文献

参考文献19

  • 1[1]Foy C D. The physiology of plant adaptation to mineral stress [J]. Iowa State J. Res., 1983, 57:355-392.
  • 2[2]Delhaize E and Ryan P R. Aluminum toxicity and tolerance in plant [J]. Plant Physiol., 1995, 107:315-321.
  • 3[3]Wallace S U, Henning S J and Anderson I C. Elongation, Al concentration and hematoxylin staining of aluminum-treated wheat roots [J]. Iowa State J. Res., 1981, 57:97-106.
  • 4[4]Bennet R J and Breen C M. The aluminum signal: new dimensions to mechanisms of aluminum tolerance [J]. Plant Soil, 1991, 134:153-166.
  • 5[5]Ryan P R, Ditomaso J M and Kochian L V. Aluminum toxicity in roots: an investigation of spatial sensitivity and the role of the root cap [J]. J. Experimental Botany, 1993, 44:437-446.
  • 6[6]Ma J F. Role of organic acids in detoxification of aluminum in higher plants [J]. Plant Cell Physiol.,2000, 41(4):383-390.
  • 7[7]Li X F. Ma J F and Matsumoto H. Pattern of Alinduced secretion of organic acids differs between rye and wheat [J]. Plant Physiol., 2000, 123:1537-1543.
  • 8[8]Aniol A. Genetics of tolerance to aluminum in wheat (triticum aestivum L. Thell) [J]. Plant Soil, 1990, 123:729-744.
  • 9[9]Rengel Z and Robinson D L. Determination of cation exchange capacity of ryegrass roots by summing exchangeable cations [J]. Plant Soil, 1989, 116:217-222.
  • 10[10]Allan D L, Shann J R and Bertsch P M. Role of root cell walls in iron deficiency of soybean (Glycine max) and aluminum toxicity of wheat (Triticum aestivum), Plant Nutrition-Physiology and Applications [M]. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990. 345-349.

同被引文献424

引证文献16

二级引证文献191

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部