[1]武德功,王俊,张露雨,等.抗、感玉米幼苗玉米蚜为害后不同时间的生理响应[J].江苏农业学报,2018,(03):493-502.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2018.03.003]
　WU De-gong,WANG Jun,ZHANG Lu-yu,et al.Physiological response of resistant and susceptible maize seedlings at different time after Rhopalosiphum maidis stress[J].,2018,(03):493-502.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2018.03.003]
点击复制

抗、感玉米幼苗玉米蚜为害后不同时间的生理响应()
分享到：

江苏农业学报[ISSN:1006-6977/CN:61-1281/TN]

卷:
期数:
2018年03期
页码:
493-502
栏目:
遗传育种·生理生化
出版日期:
2018-06-25

文章信息/Info

Title:
Physiological response of resistant and susceptible maize seedlings at different time after Rhopalosiphum maidis stress
作者:
武德功1; 王俊2; 张露雨1; 杜存康1; 杜军利1; 黄伟东1; 易克传1; 余海兵1
（1.安徽科技学院农学院，安徽凤阳233100；2.安徽省农业科学院烟草研究所，安徽合肥230001）
Author(s):
WU De-gong1; WANG Jun2; ZHANG Lu-yu1; DU Cun-kang1; DU Jun-li1; HUANG Wei-dong1; YI Ke-chuan1; YU Hai-bing1
（1. College of Agriculture, Anhui Science and Technology University, Fengyang 233100, China;2.Institute of Tobacco, Anhui Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hefei 230001, China)
关键词:
玉米蚜; 玉米; 抗蚜性
Keywords:
Rhopalosiphum maidis; Zea mays; aphid resistance
分类号:
S433.1
DOI:
doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2018.03.003
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
为探究抗、感玉米幼苗在玉米蚜（Rhopalosiphum maidis）为害后不同时间的生理响应，本试验初步测定了接种蚜虫后不同时间（0 h、24 h、48 h、96 h）感蚜品种蠡玉16和抗蚜品种郑单958三叶期叶片的叶绿素、丙二醛、可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白质含量及5种保护酶活性的变化。结果表明，随着接种蚜虫时间的增加，两个玉米品种的叶绿素含量呈先下降后上升的趋势；两个玉米品种的丙二醛、可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白质含量呈先升高后下降的趋势；在接种蚜虫后24 h时，两个品种的叶绿素含量下降到最小值，其中郑单958的叶绿素含量下降幅度小于蠡玉16；在接种蚜虫24 h时，两个品种的丙二醛、可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白质含量上升达到最大值，其中郑单958的可溶性糖和丙二醛含量上升幅度低于蠡玉16，郑单958的可溶性蛋白质含量上升幅度大于蠡玉16；在整个时间段内（0 h、24 h、48 h、96 h），感蚜品种蠡玉16对照组的可溶性糖和可溶性蛋白质含量均高于抗蚜品种郑单958对照组。因此，叶绿素含量下降幅度与抗蚜性呈负相关关系，抗性高的品种下降缓慢，而可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白质含量与抗蚜性呈负相关，含量低的品种抗性较高。在蚜虫为害过程中，两个玉米品种的超氧化物歧化酶（SOD）、过氧化物酶（POD）、过氧化氢酶（CAT）活性均呈先升高后下降的趋势，苯丙氨酸解氨酶（PAL)活性呈逐渐升高的趋势，而两个玉米品种的多酚氧化酶（PPO）活性表现不一致，郑单958的PPO活性随玉米蚜刺吸时间的延长而上升，蠡玉16的PPO活性随刺吸时间的延长而下降。感蚜品种蠡玉16的SOD、POD、CAT和PAL活性升高率一直低于抗蚜品种郑单958；蠡玉16的PPO活性接种蚜虫前期高于郑单958，到了接种蚜虫后期则低于郑单958。说明SOD、CAT、POD活性升高可能是玉米接种蚜虫前期(0～24 h)抗蚜的主要因素，PPO、PAL活性升高可能是玉米接种蚜虫后期(48～96 h)抗蚜的主要因素。
Abstract:
In order to investigate the physiological response of resistant and susceptible maize seedlings at different time after Rhopalosiphum maidis stress, the dynamic changes of malondialdehyde (MDA), soluble sugar, chlorophyll (Chl.), soluble protein and five protective enzymes in Zhengdan958(resistant variety) and Liyu16(susceptible variety) were measured at different time(0 h, 24 h, 48 h, 96 h) in three leaf stage. The results showed that with the increase of aphid stress time, the chlorophyll content of the two maize varieties first decreased, then increased. However, the contents of malondialdehyde, soluble sugar and soluble protein in the two maize varieties first increased, then decreased. The chlorophyll content of the two maize varieties decreased to the minimum value at 24 h after aphid stress, and chlorophyll content of Zhengdan 958 decreased less than that of Liyu 16. The content of MDA, soluble sugar and soluble protein of two varieties increased to the maximum at 24 h after aphid stress. The increase of soluble sugar and malondialdehyde in Zhengdan 958 was lower than that in Liyu 16, but the increase of soluble protein in Zhengdan 958 was greater than that in Liyu 16. In the entire period of time (0 h, 24 h, 48 h, 96 h), the contents of soluble sugar and soluble protein in the control group of susceptible variety Liyu 16 were higher than those in the control group of resistant cultivar Zhengdan 958 . Therefore, the decrease of chlorophyll content was negatively correlated with aphid resistance, and the varieties with high resistance declined slowly. The contents of soluble sugar, soluble protein were negatively correlated with aphid resistance, the varieties with lower soluble sugar and lower soluble protein had higher resistance. During the process of aphid stress, superoxide dismutase(SOD), peroxidase(POD) and catalase (CAT) of two maize varieties first increased and then decreased, the activity of phenylalanine ammonia lyase (PAL) increased gradually, while the activity of polyphenol oxidase(PPO) in the two maize varieties was not consistent, and the activity of PPO in Zhengdan 958 was increased with the prolongation of sucking time, but the activity of that in Liyu 16 decreased. The activities of SOD, POD, CAT and PAL of susceptible cultivar Liyu 16 were lower than those of the anti-aphid variety Zhengdan 958. The PPO activity of Liyu 16 was higher than that of Zhengdan 958 in the early stage, but it was lower than that of Zhengdan 958 in the later period. Indicating that the increase of SOD, CAT and POD activity may be the main factor of resistance to aphids in 0-24 h, and the increase of PPO and PAL activity may be the main factor of resistance to aphids in 48-96 h.

参考文献/References:

[1]郭春爱. 中国玉米消费分析与展望[J]. 农业展望, 2016, 12(8):1-5.
[2]杨俊芸,陈洪梅,谭静. 大力发展青贮玉米促进云南畜牧业发展——云南省发展青贮玉米的思考[J]. 西南农业学报, 2014, 17(Z1): 325-329.
[3]程伟东，杜青，张刘其，等. 不同地理气候条件对玉米杂交新组合 产量及相关性状的影响[J].南方农业学报，2016，47（1）：29-36.
[4]BLACKMAN R L， EASTOP V F. Aphids on the worlds crops: An identification and information guide[M]. New York ：John Wiley & Sons, 2000:466.
[5]PERRY M J, VENNERS S A, BARR D B, et al. Environmental pyrethroid and organophosphorus insecticide exposures and sperm concentration[J]. Reproductive Toxicology, 2007, 23(1): 113－118.
[6]李远,赵曼,郭线茹,等. 不同玉米品种(系)田间抗蚜性的初步鉴定[J]. 河南农业大学学报,2012,46(3):307-312.
[7]徐雪,吕晓坤,何力,等. 玉米不同品种对玉米蚜的抗性鉴定[J]. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学版),2013,28(4):598-601.
[8]宋伟,江俊起,缪勇. 不同玉米品种抗蚜性研究[J]. 生物灾害科学, 2014, 37(4): 288-292.
[9]张衍干,黄吉,施伟迪,等. 不同玉米品种对玉米蚜的抗性及其与瓢虫的联合控害作用[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2016,28(5): 815-819.
[10]武德功,杜军利,邢素芝,等. 6个糯玉米品种对玉米蚜的抗性评价[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2016, 44(12): 38-40.
[11]王怡,赵曼,田体伟,等. 不同玉米品种玉米蚜田间消长与其主要生化物质的相关性研究[J]. 河南农业大学学报, 2016,50(3): 364-369.
[12]赵文峰,张泽民,付国占,等. 不同抗性玉米自交系感蚜期四种酶活性变化分析[J]. 山东农业科学,2010,42(10):46-49.
[13]高俊凤. 植物生理学实验指导[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2006.
[14]孔祥生,易现锋. 植物生理学实验技术[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2008.
[15]巫光宏,何平,黄卓烈. 生物化学实验技术[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2016.
[16]黄伟. 不同紫花苜蓿品种抗蚜性鉴定及抗蚜性机理初步研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2007.
[17]陈建明,俞晓平,葛秀春,等. 水稻植株防御白背飞虱为害的某些生理反应[J]. 中国水稻科学,2000,14(1):43-47.
[18]寇江涛. 紫花苜蓿对牛角花齿蓟马为害的生理生化响应研究[D].兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2012.
[19]陆宴辉,杨益众,印毅,等. 棉花抗蚜性及抗性遗传机制研究进展[J].昆虫知识,2004,41(4):291-294.
[20]吴青军,龚佑辉,徐宝云. 西花蓟马主要寄主植物可溶性糖和蛋白质含量测定[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2007(10): 20-22.
[21]段灿星,彭高松,王晓鸣,等. 抗感水稻品种受灰飞虱为害后的生理反应差异[J]. 应用昆虫学报,2013,50(1):145-153.
[22]武德功,贺春贵,刘长仲,等. 不同苜蓿品种对豌豆蚜的生化抗性机制[J]. 草地学报, 2011, 19(3): 498-501.
[23]李再园,王福莲,田小海. 水稻对稻飞虱抵御机制研究[J]. 热带作物学报, 2017, 38(4): 769-774.
[24]刘裕强,江玲,孙立宏,等.褐飞虱刺吸诱导的水稻一些防御性酶活性的变化[J]. 植物生理与分子生物学学报, 2005, 31 (6): 643-650.
[25]BAILLY C, BENAMAR A, CORBINEAU F, et al.Changes in malondialdehyde content and in superoxide dismutase, catalase and glutathione reductase activities in sunflower seed as related to deterioration during accelerated aging [J]. Plant Physiology, 1996, 97（1）: 104-110.
[26]黄伟,贾志宽,韩清芳. 蚜虫(Aphis medicaginis Koch)危害胁迫对不同苜蓿品种体内丙二醛含量及防御性酶含量的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2007, 27(6): 2177-2183.
[27]刘玉良,米福贵,特木尔步和,等. 苜蓿蓟马抗性与生理活性相关性研究[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2009, 37(18): 8569-8571，8613.
[28]MOLOI M J, VAN DER WESTHUIZEN A J. Antioxidative enzymes and the Russian wheat aphid (Diuraphis noxia) resistance response in wheat (Triticum aestivum)[J]. Plant Biology, 2008, 10(3): 403-407.
[29]REHMAN R U, ZIA M, CHAUDHARY M F. Salicylic acid and ascorbic acid retrieve activity of antioxidative enzymes and structure of Caralluma tuberculata calli on PEG stress[J]. General physiology and biophysics, 2017,36(2)：167-174.
[30]SAHU B, SAHU A K, CHENNAREDDY S R, et al. Insights on germinability and desiccation tolerance in developing neem seeds (Azadirachta indica): Role of AOS, antioxidative enzymes and dehydrin-like protein[J]. Plant Physiol Biochem, 2017, 112: 64-73.
[31]张家洋. 重金属及盐胁迫对绿金合果芋生理特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2016, 28(4):601-608.
[32]LIU H, ZHANG C, WANG J, et al. Influence and interaction of iron and cadmium on photosynthesis and antioxidative enzymes in two rice cultivars[J]. Chemosphere, 2017, 171: 240-247.
[33]HE S, HU Y, WANG H, et al. Effects of indole-3-acetic acid on arsenic uptake and antioxidative enzymes in Pteris cretica var. nervosa and Pteris ensiformis[J]. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 2017, 19(3): 231-238.
[34]王亓翔,许路,吴进才. 水稻品种对稻纵卷叶螟抗性的物理及生化机制[J]. 昆虫学报, 2008, 51(12): 1265-1270.
[35]梁晓,卢芙萍,卢辉,等. 保护酶 CAT 在木薯种质抗螨中的功能初步研究[J]. 热带作物学报, 2017, 38（2）:343-348.
[36]蔡冲,徐盈盈，崔旭红. 番茄不同抗性品种响应 B 型烟粉虱胁迫的生理特性[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(13): 2524-2533.
[37]武德功,王森山,刘长仲,等. 豌豆蚜刺吸胁迫对不同苜蓿品种体内单宁含量及生理活性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2011, 19(2): 351-355.
[38]张丽,常金华,罗耀武. 不同高粱基因型感蚜虫前后POD、PPO、PAL酶活性变化分析[J]. 农业生物技术科学,2005,21(7):40-42,198.
[39]黄小贞,赵德刚. 植物苯丙氨酸解氨酶表达调控机理的研究进展[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2017, 45(4): 16-20.
[40]张洪英,魏淑花,张蓉,等. 豌豆蚜为害对苜蓿品种酶活性和营养物质的影响[J]. 草业科学, 2016, 33(1):144-152.
[41]赵伶俐,范崇辉,葛红,等. 植物多酚氧化酶及其活性特征的研究进展[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2005, 20(3): 156-159.
[42]王曼玲,胡中立,周明全,等. 植物多酚氧化酶的研究进展[J]. 植物学通报,2005,22(2):215-222.
[43]梁晓,卢芙萍,卢辉,等.保护酶 PPO 在木薯种质抗螨中的功能初步研究[J]. 生物技术通报, 2017, 33(4):143-148.

相似文献/References:

[1]宝华宾,梁帅强,吕远大,等.玉米籽粒蛋白含量Meta-QTL及候选基因分析[J].江苏农业学报,2016,(04):736.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.100-4440.2016.04.004]
　BAO Hua-bin,LIANG Shuai-qiang,LYU Yuan- da,et al.Analysis of meta-QTL and candidate genes related to protein concentration in maize grain[J].,2016,(03):736.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.100-4440.2016.04.004]
[2]印志同,秦秋霞,阚欣,等.玉米快速叶绿素荧光参数全基因组关联分析[J].江苏农业学报,2016,(04):746.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.100-4440.2016.04.005]
　YIN Zhi-tong,QIN Qiu-xia,KAN Xin,et al.Genome-wide association analysis of fast chlorophyll fluorescence parameters in maize[J].,2016,(03):746.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.100-4440.2016.04.005]
[3]岳海旺,陈淑萍,彭海成,等.玉米籽粒灌浆特性品种间比较[J].江苏农业学报,2016,(05):1043.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2016.05.014]
　YUE Hai-wang,CHEN Shu-ping,PENG Hai-cheng,et al.Grain filling characteristics in maize materials[J].,2016,(03):1043.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2016.05.014]
[4]周玲,梁帅强,林峰,等.玉米二态性 InDel 位点的鉴定和分子标记开发[J].江苏农业学报,2016,(06):1223.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2016.06.005]
　ZHOU Ling,LIANG Shuai-qiang,LIN Feng,et al.Biallelic InDel loci detection and molecular marker development in maize[J].,2016,(03):1223.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2016.06.005]
[5]刘朝茂,李成云.玉米与大豆间作对玉米叶片衰老的影响[J].江苏农业学报,2017,(02):322.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2017.02.013]
　LIU Chao-mao,LI Cheng-yun.Effects of maize/soybean intercropping on maize leaf senescence[J].,2017,(03):322.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2017.02.013]
[6]江彬,毕银丽,申慧慧,等.氮营养与AM真菌协同对玉米生长及土壤肥力的影响[J].江苏农业学报,2017,(02):327.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2017.02.014]
　JIANG Bin,BI Yin-li,SHEN Hui-hui,et al.Synergetic effects of Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus and nitrogen on maize growth and soil fertility[J].,2017,(03):327.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2017.02.014]
[7]李国锋,葛敏,吕远大.Opaque2转录因子对玉米α-醇溶蛋白基因家族成员表达的影响[J].江苏农业学报,2015,(06):1224.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2015.06.006]
　LI Guo-feng,GE Min,L Yuan-da.Differential expression of α-zein family genes regulated by Opaque2 transcription factor[J].,2015,(03):1224.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2015.06.006]
[8]管莉,张阿英.CaM 与 ZmCCaMK 相互作用参与 BR 诱导的玉米叶片抗氧化防护[J].江苏农业学报,2015,(01):10.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2015.01.002]
　GUAN Li,ZHANG A-ying.CaM-ZmCCaMK interaction involved in brassinosteroid-induced antioxidant defense in leaves of maize[J].,2015,(03):10.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2015.01.002]
[9]王元琮,何冰,林峰,等.调控玉米阻止授粉后叶片衰老的QTL定位[J].江苏农业学报,2017,(04):747.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2017.04.004]
　WANG Yuan-cong,HE Bing,LIN Feng,et al.QTL mapping for pollination-prevention on leaf senescence[J].,2017,(03):747.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2017.04.004]
[10]田礼欣,李丽杰,刘旋,等.外源海藻糖对盐胁迫下玉米幼苗根系生长及生理特性的影响[J].江苏农业学报,2017,(04):754.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2017.04.005]
　TIAN Li-xin,LI Li-jie,LIU Xuan,et al.Root growth and physiological characteristics of salt-stressed maize seedlings in response to exogenous trehalose[J].,2017,(03):754.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2017.04.005]

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期：2018-01-05 基金项目：安徽省教育厅重点项目（KJ2016A825、KJ2018A0543）；安徽科技学院引进人才项目(ZRC2012326、ZRC2014399）；国家级大学生创新课题项目（201610879004、201710879074）；安徽科技学院植物保护重点学科项目（AKZDXK2015C04）；安徽省省级质量工程项目植物保护特色专业专项项目（2015tszy022）；安徽省农业科学院人才发展专项资金项目（17F0913） 作者简介：武德功（1980-），男，河南周口人，博士，讲师，主要从事植物抗虫研究。（E-mail）wudg@ahstu.edu.cn。王俊，为共同第一作者。 通讯作者：余海兵，（E-mail）hsm50721@163.com
更新日期/Last Update: 2018-07-04