干旱胁迫对3种早熟禾属牧草表型特征和生理特性的影响

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202604.006

应用生态学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (4): 1075-1082.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202604.006

干旱胁迫对3种早熟禾属牧草表型特征和生理特性的影响

阿芸¹, 刘文辉^2*, 张金青³, 朱永明¹, 黄丹妮¹, 刘慧祥¹

¹青海理工学院生态与环境科学学院, 青海省高原气候变化及其生态效应重点实验室, 西宁 810016;
²青海大学畜牧兽医科学院, 西宁 810016;
³宁夏大学林业与草业学院, 银川 750021

收稿日期:2025-11-26 修回日期:2026-03-02 出版日期:2026-04-18 发布日期:2026-05-29
通讯作者: *E-mail: qhliuwenhui@163.com
作者简介:阿芸, 女, 1993年生, 副教授。主要从事生态系统保护与草地退化修复研究。E-mail: 1421538664@qq.com
基金资助:
青海理工学院“昆仑英才”人才引进科研项目(2023-QLGKLYCZX-011)、青海省帅才科学家负责制项目(2023-NK-147)、现代农业产业技术体系建设专项资金项目(CARS-34)和宁夏自然科学基金项目(2024AAC03095)

Effects of drought stress on phenotypic traits and physiological characteristics of three Poa forage species

A Yun¹, LIU Wenhui^2*, ZHANG Jinqing³, ZHU Yongming¹, HUANG Danni¹, LIU Huixiang¹

¹Qinghai Provincial Key Laboratory of Plateau Climate Change and Corresponding Ecological and Environmental Effects, School of Ecology and Environmental Science, Qinghai University of Science and Technology, Xining 810016, China;
²Academy of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China;
³College of Forestry and Grassland, Ningxia University, Yinchuan 750021, China

Received:2025-11-26 Revised:2026-03-02 Online:2026-04-18 Published:2026-05-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为探究早熟禾属牧草在干旱胁迫下的品种响应差异及内在调控机制,本研究以青海冷地早熟禾、青海草地早熟禾、青海扁茎早熟禾品种为供试材料,采用人工盆栽控水法设置土壤含水量梯度:对照(60%)、中度干旱(45%)和重度干旱(30%),测定生长参数和生理特性指标,并结合隶属函数法综合评价其抗旱性。结果表明:随着干旱程度加重,3种牧草的株高和干重均显著下降,降幅分别为12.3%～34.4%和12.1%～34.1%,且在干旱条件下青海草地早熟禾的株高和干重均最高。除了青海草地早熟禾的可溶性蛋白外,3种牧草的可溶性糖、脯氨酸、可溶性蛋白含量均在干旱胁迫下显著上升,最高增幅达151.7%。随着干旱程度加重,青海冷地早熟禾的超氧化物歧化酶、过氧化物酶、过氧化氢酶活性均呈下降趋势,降幅可达0.7%～65.5%,而青海草地早熟禾和青海扁茎早熟禾的3种抗氧化酶活性均呈先升后降趋势;除了青海扁茎早熟禾的过氧化氢(H₂O₂)外,其他两者的H₂O₂、三者超氧阴离子、羟自由基(·OH)含量均逐渐上升,增幅为2.6%～37.3%。双因素方差分析显示,叶宽、抗氧化酶活性及活性氧含量受品种遗传特性的影响更显著,而株高、干重及渗透调节物质对干旱胁迫的响应更敏感。干旱胁迫下,株高、干重与脯氨酸、·OH呈显著负相关。抗旱性综合评价排序为:青海草地早熟禾＞青海冷地早熟禾＞青海扁茎早熟禾。青海草地早熟禾在干旱胁迫下不仅株高、干重优势显著,且渗透调节物质积累适度,抗氧化酶系统功能稳定,推荐将其用于干旱半干旱地区的人工草地建植或天然草地修复。

关键词: 早熟禾, 干旱胁迫, 表性特征, 生理特性, 抗旱性评价

Abstract: To investigate the variations and underlying regulatory mechanisms of Poa species under drought stress, we examined growth parameters and physiological characteristic indices of P. crymophila, P. pratensis, and P. pra-tensis var. anceps under three soil water contents, control (60%), moderate drought (45%), and severe drought (30%) by using the artificial potted water control method. We further comprehensively evaluated the drought tole-rance by the membership function method. The results showed that with the intensification of drought stress, plant height and dry weight of the three Poa species decreased significantly, with a reduction range of 12.3%-34.4% and 12.1%-34.1%. Except for the soluble protein content of P. pratensis, the contents of soluble sugar, proline, and soluble protein in the three species increased significantly under drought stress, with the highest increase of 151.7%. The activities of superoxide dismutase, peroxidase, and catalase in P. crymophila showed a decreasing trend, with a reduction range of 0.7%-65.5%, while those in P. pratensis and P. pratensis var. anceps exhibited an increase-decrease trend. Except for the hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) content of P. pratensis var. anceps, the contents of H₂O₂, superoxide anion, and hydroxyl radical (·OH) in the three species all showed an increasing trend, with growth rates ranging from 2.6% to 37.3%. Leaf width, antioxidant enzyme activities, and reactive oxygen species content were more significantly affected by genotype, while plant height, dry weight, and osmotic adjustment substances were more prominently influenced by drought stress. Under drought stress, plant height and dry weight showed a significant negative correlation with proline and ·OH. The ranking of comprehensive drought tolerance was as follows: P. pratensis > P. crymophila > P. pratensis var. anceps. P. pratensis exhibited not only significant advantages in plant height and dry weight under drought stress, but also moderate accumulation of osmotic regulatory substances and stable antioxidant enzyme system function. We recommend the use of P. pratensis in establishing artificial grasslands or restoring natural grasslands in arid and semi-arid regions.

Key words: Poa, drought stress, phenotypic trait, physiological characteristic, drought resistance evaluation

阿芸, 刘文辉, 张金青, 朱永明, 黄丹妮, 刘慧祥. 干旱胁迫对3种早熟禾属牧草表型特征和生理特性的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(4): 1075-1082.

A Yun, LIU Wenhui, ZHANG Jinqing, ZHU Yongming, HUANG Danni, LIU Huixiang. Effects of drought stress on phenotypic traits and physiological characteristics of three Poa forage species[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2026, 37(4): 1075-1082.

参考文献

[1] 龚郑洁, 雷勇, 钟露露, 等. 干旱胁迫下珠江流域植被响应的滞后效应及损失概率评估. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(4): 1083-1091
[2] 李祎, 亓雯雯, 李绍阳, 等. 不同萌发阶段的羊草种子对干旱-复水的响应. 生态学杂志, 2024, 43(7): 1995-2000
[3] 景美玲, 马玉寿, 李世雄, 等. 早熟禾属3种牧草在祁连山区的适应性表现. 江苏农业科学, 2014, 42(12): 250-252
[4] 杨慧茹, 马玉寿, 李世雄, 等. 青海草地早熟禾栽培草地植被特征及土壤物理性状动态. 草业科学, 2011, 28(6): 910-914
[5] 李青云, 马玉寿, 韩德林. 冷地早熟禾种子生产的优化栽培技术研究. 中国草地, 1998(5): 36-38
[6] 何克燕, 王佳豪, 张燕, 等. 青海扁茎早熟禾形态特征与生物量对磷添加的响应. 草业科学, 2022, 39(11): 2414-2423
[7] Santini Jr L, Craven D, Rodriguez DRO, et al. Extreme drought triggers parallel shifts in wood anatomical and physiological traits in upper treeline of the Mediterranean Andes. Ecological Processes, 2024, 13: 10
[8] 桂意云, 李海碧, 梁强, 等. 基于人为控水和自然水分胁迫下的甘蔗茎节生长变化. 中国农业科技导报, 2024, 26(7): 25-36
[9] 王晶, 伏兵哲, 李淑霞, 等. 外源褪黑素对干旱胁迫下沙芦草幼苗生长和生理特性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(11): 2947-2957
[10] 蔺亚平, 杨成行, 苏家豪, 等. 6种高寒禾草对干旱胁迫的生理响应及抗旱性评价. 草业科学, 2021, 38 (12): 2397-2405
[11] Seleiman MF, Al-Suhaibani N, Ali N, et al. Drought stress impacts on plants and different approaches to alle-viate its adverse effects. Plants, 2021, 10: 259
[12] 邹琦. 植物生理学实验指导. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2005: 161-162
[13] Buysse J, Merckx R. An improved colorimetric method to quantify sugar content of plant tissue. Journal of Experimental Botany, 1993, 44: 1627-1629
[14] Bradford MM. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Analytical Biochemistry, 1976, 72: 248-254
[15] Giannopolitis CN, Ries SK. Superoxide dismutases. I. Occurrence in higher plants. Plant Physiology, 1977, 59: 309-314
[16] Chance B, Maehly AC. Assay of catalase and peroxidases. Methods in Enzymology, 1955, 2: 764-775
[17] Havir EA, Mchale NA. Biochemical and developmental characterization of multiple forms of catalase in tobacco leaves. Plant Physiology, 1987, 84: 450-455
[18] Willekens H, Chamnongpol S, Davey M, et al. Catalase is a sink for H₂O₂ and is indispensable for stress defence in C3 plants. The European Molecular Biology Organization Journal, 1997, 16: 4806-4816
[19] Liu YJ, Zhao ZG, Si J, et al. Brassinosteroids alleviate chilling-induced oxidative damage by enhancing antioxidant defense system in suspension cultured cells of Chorispora bungeana. Plant Growth Regulation, 2009, 59: 207-214
[20] Elstner EF, Heupel A. Formation of hydrogen peroxide by isolated cell walls from horseradish (Armoracia lapathifolia Gilib.). Planta, 1976, 130: 175-180
[21] 王亚, 刘延, 范志伟, 等. 入侵植物石茅种子萌发及幼苗生长对干旱胁迫的响应特征. 草业科学, 2023, 40(8): 2020-2027
[22] Basu S, Ramegowda V, Kumar A, et al. Plant adaptation to drought stress. F1000Research, 2016, 5: 1554
[23] Auler PA, Souza GM, da Silva Engela MRG, et al. Stress memory of physiological, biochemical and metabolomic responses in two different rice genotypes under drought stress: The scale matters. Plant Science, 2021, 311: 110994
[24] 张继元, 安海全, 潘靖一, 等. 7个紫花苜蓿品种种子萌发及幼苗生长的抗旱性评价. 草业学报, 2026, 35(2): 68-82
[25] 李英浩, 刘景辉, 赵宝平, 等. 干旱胁迫对燕麦生长及叶片光系统Ⅱ活性的影响. 西北植物学报, 2020, 40(10): 1706-1713
[26] 包明芳, 秦燕, 陈彩锦, 等. 111份紫花苜蓿种质资源苗期表型抗旱性鉴定评价. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(19): 3825-3836
[27] 李铭怡, 贾濠基, 董文豪, 等. 油菜素内脂对干旱胁迫下护坡植物高羊茅生理特性的调控效应. 草业科学, 2025, 42(1): 140-151
[28] 杨晓江, 李静, 金轲, 等. 干旱胁迫下丛枝菌根真菌对羊草功能性状的影响. 中国草地学报, 2023, 45(5): 20-31
[29] 高雯珊, 徐创军, 谷旭阳, 等. 三北地区杨树杂交后代‘沙新杨’系列苗期抗旱性综合评价. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(1): 24-32
[30] Bandurska H, Niedziela J, Pietrowska-Borek M, et al. Regulation of proline biosynthesis and resistance to drought stress in two barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) genotypes of different origin. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2017, 118: 427-437
[31] 于明含, 杨蕾, 吕慧, 等. 幼苗期梭梭对干旱胁迫的响应及耐旱阈值分析. 生态学报, 2026, 46(3): 1301-1309
[32] 张采薇, 刘晓娟. 干旱胁迫对柳兰幼苗生长和抗逆生理特性的影响. (2025-09-30) [2025-10-25]. 草业科学. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/62.1069.S.20250930.1206.006
[33] Gupta A, Rico-Medina A, Can¨o-Delgado AI. The physio-logy of plant responses to drought. Science, 2020, 368: 266-269
[34] 李军宏, 王远远, 夏军, 等. 两个不同耐旱性棉花品种根系生理特性对干旱的响应. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(10): 3453-3460
[35] 闫兴富, 邓晓娟, 王静, 等. 种子大小和干旱胁迫对辽东栎幼苗生长和生理特性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(10): 3331-3339
[36] 刘月月, 高娅楠, 陆爽, 等. 乙烯利对草地早熟禾水分胁迫及复水过程中抗氧化酶的影响. 草地学报, 2024, 32(8): 2540-2547
[37] 作建芬, 林益超, 刘维维, 等. 聚乙二醇-6000模拟干旱胁迫对三种牧草种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响. 生态学报, 2025, 45(13): 6414-6426
[38] 王代军, 温洋. 温度胁迫下几种冷季型草坪草抗性机制的研究. 草业学报, 1998, 7(1): 76-81
[39] 宋艳艳, 徐培月, 何功秀, 等. 外源多效唑对干旱胁迫下闽楠幼苗抗旱性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(10): 2667-2676
[40] 王金强, 李欢, 刘庆, 等. 干旱胁迫对甘薯苗期根系分化和生理特性的影响. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(9): 3155-3163
[41] 周菲, 谢鹏远, 王静, 等. PEG-6000模拟干旱胁迫对向日葵幼苗生理特性的影响. 黑龙江农业科学, 2025, 8(1): 49-54
[42] 刘文萍, 刘霞霞, 韩俊梅, 等. 芝麻苗期干旱生理生化指标响应特征及其基因表达分析. 干旱地区农业研究, 2024, 42(1): 152-158
[43] 谭秦亮, 程琴, 李佳慧, 等. 不同甘蔗品种幼苗对干旱胁迫的生理响应及抗旱性评价. (2025-08-04) [2025-10-05]. 作物杂志. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/11.1808.S.20250804.1131.002

干旱胁迫对3种早熟禾属牧草表型特征和生理特性的影响

Effects of drought stress on phenotypic traits and physiological characteristics of three Poa forage species

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	高雯珊, 徐创军, 谷旭阳, 聂楚妍, 张雨童, 王志刚, 刘建凤. 三北地区杨树杂交后代‘沙新杨’系列苗期抗旱性综合评价 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(1): 24-32.
[2]	赵文多, 李安婷, 朱毅, 李雨昕, 叶子健, 任海燕. 干旱和盐胁迫下γ-氨基丁酸和氯化血红素复合包衣对新麦草种子萌发和幼苗生长的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(1): 82-92.
[3]	常丹, 黄焱辉, 田敏, 蔡艳飞, 孟静. 外源独脚金内酯对干旱胁迫下2种报春苣苔属植物生长及生理特性的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(3): 802-810.
[4]	何建宁, 张振, 石玉, 于振文. 宽幅精播与行距对小麦耗水特性和产量的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(7): 1833-1842.
[5]	宋艳艳, 徐培月, 何功秀, 胡孔飞, 及利, 杨丽丽, 孙洪刚, 张勰. 外源多效唑对干旱胁迫下闽楠幼苗抗旱性的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(10): 2667-2676.
[6]	王晶, 伏兵哲, 李淑霞, 王星, 宋文学, 叶雨浓, 胡鹏飞, 王通锐. 外源褪黑素对干旱胁迫下沙芦草幼苗生长和生理特性的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(11): 2947-2957.
[7]	赵雷, 靳海笛, 曹晓云, 邓文辉, 杜灵娟. 六个东方铁筷子品种对干旱胁迫的生理响应及抗旱性评价 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(10): 2644-2654.
[8]	钱必长, 赵晨, 赵继浩, 赖华江, 李向东, 刘兆新. 不同花生棉花间作模式对花生生育后期生理特性及产量的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(9): 2422-2430.
[9]	张永娥, 赵阳, 路伟伟, 余新晓, 张晓明, 王昭艳, 刘冰, 辛艳. CO₂浓度和土壤含水量对植物个体尺度短期水分利用效率的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(6): 1505-1510.
[10]	王慧, 王冬梅, 张泽洲, 任怀新, 黄薇, 谢正丰. 外源褪黑素对干旱胁迫下黑麦草和苜蓿抗氧化能力及养分吸收的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1311-1319.
[11]	李月灵, 金则新, 罗光宇, 陈超, 孙中帅, 王晓燕. 干旱胁迫下接种丛枝菌根真菌对七子花非结构性碳水化合物积累及C、N、P化学计量特征的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(4): 963-971.
[12]	冯晓龙, 刘冉, 李从娟, 王玉刚, 孔璐, 王增如. 梭梭和多枝柽柳的枝干光合及其主要影响因子 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(2): 344-352.
[13]	伍亮, 高歌, 史爽, 李龙萱, 彭秀娟, 李文慧, 王萍, 张志强. 水位变化影响蝌蚪存活、形态表型和植物血凝素反应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(12): 3427-3432.
[14]	谭啸, 徐杨雪, 李聂贵, 段志鹏, 蒋瑀霁, 曾庆飞, 强娟. 超声波对铜绿微囊藻与蛋白核小球藻生理特征及竞争生长的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(10): 2845-2852.
[15]	孙晓莉, 贾春燕, 田寿乐, 徐文燕, 王金平, 冉昆, 沈广宁. 外源甲基乙二醛对干旱胁迫下板栗幼苗的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(1): 104-110.