腐殖酸单侧刺激对玉米根系生长的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.02.009

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】腐殖酸的结构复杂,功能多样,研究腐殖酸对玉米根系生长的直接和间接效应,揭示腐殖酸对玉米根系调控的机制,可为腐殖酸肥料增效剂的进一步开发与应用提供理论支撑。【方法】以郑单958作为供试玉米品种,采用霍格兰营养液培养玉米育苗,将玉米根系分根设计,处理分别为CK-左对照侧（CK-C₁）、CK-右对照侧（CK-C₂）、HA-未施侧（HA-C）、HA-施用侧（HA-T）、OHA3-未施侧（OHA3-C）、OHA3-施用侧（OHA3-T）、OHA6-未施侧（OHA6-C）和OHA6-施用侧（OHA6-T）8个处理。研究其对玉米生物量、根系活力、根系形态以及不同器官主要化学组分的影响。【结果】（1）分根单侧施用腐殖酸显著增加玉米施用侧和未施侧的根鲜重,与对照相比,施用侧提高21.9%—78.6%,未施侧提高27.9%—49.3%;（2）添加腐殖酸显著增加玉米施用侧和未施侧的根系活力和TTC还原总量。与对照相比,OHA6-施用侧处理的玉米根系活力和根系TTC还原总量提高幅度最大,分别提高76.9%和216.9%,HA-施用侧和OHA3-施用侧处理与对照相比,玉米根系活力分别提高59.8%和35.1%, OHA6-未施侧、HA-未施侧和OHA3-未施侧处理与对照相比,玉米根系活力分别提高62.2%、53.6%和25.5%;（3）添加腐殖酸处理显著增加玉米未施侧和施用侧的根体积、根表面积、根平均直径、根长度和根数量;（4）分根单侧施用腐殖酸可有效增加玉米根系酯类化合物、蛋白质类物质、氨基酸类物质、核酸纤维素和多糖的含量,腐殖酸处理的施用侧较未施侧相比,更有利于玉米根系碳水化合物的积累,而腐殖酸处理下的未施侧更有利于玉米根系核酸的积累。各腐殖酸处理的玉米施用侧和未施侧地上部碳水化合物的含量明显高于空白处理。【结论】分根单侧施用腐殖酸可增加玉米根鲜重、根干重、根系活力和根系TTC还原总量,且腐殖酸施用侧的作用效果优于未施侧,单侧施用腐殖酸处理的整株根系生长也优于两侧均未施腐殖酸的对照处理。因此,腐殖酸对玉米根系生长既存在直接效应又存在间接效应,且直接效应大于间接效应。

关键词: 腐殖酸, 玉米, 分根试验, FTIR技术, 风化煤

Abstract:

【Objective】 Humic acid has complex structure and diverse functions. Studying the direct and indirect effects of humic acid on the growth of maize roots and revealing the regulation mechanism of humic acid on maize roots can provide the theoretical support for further research on the development and application of humic acid fertilizer synergists. 【Method】 A hydroponic experiment was carried out using Hoagland nutrition solution as the basic cultural liquid and maize cultivar of ‘Zheng Dan 958’ as material with a split-root design. The method of field plot split zone experiment was adopted and eight test treatments was set which was CK-control side (CK-C), CK-control side (CK-C) ), HA-non-applied side (HA-C), HA-applied side (HA-T), OHA3-non-applied side (OHA3-C), OHA3-applied side (OHA3-T), OHA6-non-applied side ( OHA6-C) and OHA6-applied side (OHA6-T) to study its effects on biomass, root vitality, root morphology and main chemical components of maize different organs. 【Result】 (1) Single-sided application of humic acid to separate roots significantly increased the fresh root weight of maize on the applied and unapplied sides. Compared with the control, the fresh root weight of maize with the applied side was increased by 21.9%-78.6%, which with the unapplied side was increased by 27.9%-49.3%. (2) The addition of humic acid significantly increased the maize root activity and the total TTC reduction of maize on the applied side and the non-applied side. Compared with the control, the maize root activity and total root TTC reduction of the OHA6-applied side increased the most, which increased by 76.9% and 216.9%, respectively. Compared with the control, HA-applied side and OHA3-applied side treatments increased the maize root activity by 59.8% and 35.1%, respectively. Compared with the control, OHA6-non-applied side, HA-non-applied side and OHA3-non-applied side treatments increased the maize root activity by 62.2%, 53.6% and 25.5%, respectively. (3) Adding humic acid treatment significantly increased the root volume, root surface area, average root diameter, root length and root number on the non-applied and applied sides of maize. (4) Single root application of humic acid could effectively increase the content of maize root ester compounds, protein, amino acids, nucleic acid cellulose and polysaccharides. The application side of humic acid treatment was more conducive to maize root carbohydrates than the non-application side. However, the untreated side under humic acid treatment was more conducive to the accumulation of maize root nucleic acid. The carbohydrate content of the aboveground parts of maize treated with humic acid was significantly higher than that under the blank treatment. 【Conclusion】 Regardless of whether it was HA or OHA3 and OHA6, when humic acid was applied to separate roots on one side, the growth and activity of maize roots on the side where humic acid was applied were significantly higher than those on the side without humic acid, indicating that humic acid had a direct effect on root regulation. The root growth of the whole plant treated with humic acid on one side was better than that under the control treatment without humic acid on both sides, indicating that humic acid also had an indirect effect in regulating root growth. The root growth of the whole plant treated with humic acid on one side was better than that under the control treatment without humic acid on both sides, indicating that humic acid also had an indirect effect in regulating root growth.

Key words: humic acid, maize, split root test, FTIR technology, weathered coal

周丽平,袁亮,赵秉强,李燕婷. 腐殖酸单侧刺激对玉米根系生长的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(2): 339-349.

ZHOU LiPing,YUAN Liang,ZHAO BingQiang,LI YanTing. Effects of Single-Sided Application of Humic Acid on Maize Root Growth[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2022, 55(2): 339-349.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.02.009

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2022/V55/I2/339

图/表 10

图1

图2

图3

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

表7

参考文献 30

[1]	赵秉强, 林治安, 刘增兵. 中国肥料产业未来发展道路: 提高肥料利用率减少肥料用量. 磷肥与复肥, 2008, 23(6):1-4. doi: 10.3969/j. issn.1007-6220.2008.06.001.
	ZHAO B Q, LIN Z A, LIU Z B. The future developing route for China's fertilizer industry—increasing the use efficiency and decreasing the consumption of fertilizer. Phosphate & Compound Fertilizer, 2008, 23(6):1-4. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-6220.2008.06.001. (in Chinese)
[2]	赵秉强, 张福锁, 廖宗文, 许秀成, 徐秋明, 张夫道, 姜瑞波. 我国新型肥料发展战略研究. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2004, 10(5):536-545. doi: 10.3321/j.issn: 1008-505X.2004.05.017.
	ZHAO B Q, ZHANG F S, LIAO Z W, XU X C, XU Q M, ZHANG F D, JIANG R B. Research on development strategies of fertilizer in China. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2004, 10(5):536-545. doi: 10.3321/j.issn: 1008-505X.2004.05.017. (in Chinese)
[3]	赵秉强. 发展尿素增值技术促进尿素产品技术升级. 磷肥与复肥, 2013, 28(2):6-7. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-6220.2013.02.002.
	ZHAO B Q. Developing value-added urea technology to promote technology upgrade of urea. Phosphate & Compound Fertilizer, 2013, 28(2):6-7. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-6220.2013.02.002. (in Chinese)
[4]	ROSE M T, PATTI A F, LITTLE K R, BROWN A L, JACKSON W R, CAVAGNARO T R. A meta-analysis and review of plant-growth response to humic substances. Advances in Agronomy. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2014: 37-89. doi: 10.1016/b978-0-12-800138-7.00002-4.
[5]	MUSCOLO A, SIDARI M, NARDI S. Humic substance: relationship between structure and activity. Deeper information suggests univocal findings. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 2013, 129:57-63. doi: 10.1016/j.gexplo.2012.10.012. doi: 10.1016/j.gexplo.2012.10.012
[6]	GALAMBOS N, COMPANT S, MORETTO M, SICHER C, PUOPOLO G, WÄCKERS F, SESSITSCH A, PERTOT I, PERAZZOLLI M. Humic acid enhances the growth of tomato promoted by endophytic bacterial strains through the activation of hormone-, growth-, and transcription-related processes. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2020, 11:582267. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.582267. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.582267
[7]	CANELLAS L P, OLIVARES F L. Production of border cells and colonization of maize root tips by Herbaspirillum seropedicae are modulated by humic acid. Plant and Soil, 2017, 417(1):403-413. doi: 10.1007/s11104-017-3267-0. doi: 10.1007/s11104-017-3267-0
[8]	CHEN X G, KOU M, TANG Z H, ZHANG A J, LI H M, WEI M. Responses of root physiological characteristics and yield of sweet potato to humic acid urea fertilizer. PLoS One, 2017, 12(12): e0189715. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189715.
[9]	GARCIA-MINA J M. Stability, solubility and maximum metal binding capacity in metal-humic complexes involving humic substances extracted from peat and organic compost. Organic Geochemistry, 2006, 37(12):1960-1972. doi: 10.1016/j.orggeochem.2006.07.027. doi: 10.1016/j.orggeochem.2006.07.027
[10]	ZHOU L P, YUAN L, ZHAO B Q, LI Y T, LIN Z A. Structural characteristics of humic acids derived from Chinese weathered coal under different oxidizing conditions. PLoS One, 2019, 14(5):e0217469. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0217469.
[11]	赵世杰. 植物生理学实验指导. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2002.
	ZHAO S J. Techniques of Plant Physiological Experiment. Beijing: China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2002. (in Chinese)
[12]	申建波, 毛达如. 植物营养研究方法. 3版. 北京: 中国农业大学出版社, 2011.
	SHEN J B, MAO D R. Research methods of plant nutrition. Beijing: China Agricultural University Press, 2011. (in Chinese)
[13]	DZIUBA B, BABUCHOWSKI A, NAŁĘCZ D, NIKLEWICZ M. Identification of lactic acid bacteria using FTIR spectroscopy and cluster analysis. International Dairy Journal, 2007, 17(3):183-189. doi: 10.1016/j.idairyj.2006.02.013. doi: 10.1016/j.idairyj.2006.02.013
[14]	JACKSON M. Biomembrane structure from FTIR spectroscopy. Spectrochimica Acta Reviews, 1993, 15:53-69.
[15]	GROUP C I A. Spectroscopic methods in organic chemistry. Chemistry in Australia, 2008, 75(5):31.
[16]	SALZMANN D, HANDLEY R J, MÜLLER-SCHÄRER H. Functional significance of triazine-herbicide resistance in defence of Senecio vulgaris against a rust fungus. Basic and Applied Ecology, 2008, 9(5):577-587. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2007.10.001. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2007.10.001
[17]	孙素琴, 周群, 陈建波. 中药红外光谱分析与鉴定. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2010.
	SUN S Q, ZHOU Q, CHEN J B. Analysis of traditional Chinese medicine by infrared spectroscopy. Beijing: Chemical Industry Press, 2010. (in Chinese)
[18]	NELSON W H. Modern techniques for rapid microbiological analysis//VON NELSON W H. Modern Techniques for Rapid Microbial Analysis. VCH Verlagsgesellschaft, Weinheim: Wiley & Sons, 1991: 75-76.
[19]	ZEROUAL W, DE CHOISY C, DOGLIA S M, BOBICHON H, ANGIBOUST J F, MANFAIT M. Monitoring of bacterial growth and structural analysis as probed by FT-IR spectroscopy. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Cell Research, 1994, 1222(2):171-178. doi: 10.1016/0167-4889(94)90166-X. doi: 10.1016/0167-4889(94)90166-X
[20]	陆婉珍. 现代近红外光谱分析技术. 北京: 中国石化出版社, 2000.
	LU W Z. Modern Near Infrared Spectroscopic Techniques. Beijing: China Petrochemical Press, 2000. (in Chinese)
[21]	WONG P T, WONG R K, CAPUTO T A, GODWIN T A, RIGAS B. Infrared spectroscopy of exfoliated human cervical cells: evidence of extensive structural changes during carcinogenesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1991, 88(24):10988-10992. doi: 10.1073/pnas.88.24.10988.
[22]	SABIRJANOVNA T A, PASA S, ZHUMASILOVICH D U, TEMEL H, ORYNTAYEVNA N G. Complexation ability of modified Na-Humate and its application in removal of toxic metals from water. Desalination and Water Treatment, 2016, 57(2):776-790. doi: 10.1080/19443994.2014.969318. doi: 10.1080/19443994.2014.969318
[23]	BOGUTA P, D'ORAZIO V, SENESI N, SOKOŁOWSKA Z, SZEWCZUK-KARPISZ K. Insight into the interaction mechanism of iron ions with soil humic acids. The effect of the pH and chemical properties of humic acids. Journal of Environmental Management, 2019, 245:367-374. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.05.098. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.05.098
[24]	LI Y, FANG F, WEI J L, WU X B, CUI R Z, LI G S, ZHENG F L, TAN D S. Humic acid fertilizer improved soil properties and soil microbial diversity of continuous cropping peanut: a three-year experiment. Scientific Reports, 2019, 9:12014. doi: 10.1038/s41598- 019-48620-4. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-48620-4
[25]	KLUČÁKOVÁ M, PAVLÍKOVÁ M. Lignitic humic acids as environmentally-friendly adsorbent for heavy metals. Journal of Chemistry, 2017, 2017:7169019. doi: 10.1155/2017/7169019.
[26]	JEMELJANOVA M, KLAVINS M, OZOLA R. Physical-chemical properties and possible applications of clay minerals and humic acid composite materials. 2019, 17(S1):1023-1032.
[27]	ESHWAR M, SRILATHA M, REKHA K B, SHARMA S H K. Characterization of humic substances by functional groups and spectroscopic methods. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 2017, 6(10):1768-1774. doi: 10.20546/ijcmas.2017.610.213.
[28]	CANELLAS L P, PICCOLO A, DOBBSS L B, SPACCINI R, OLIVARES F L, ZANDONADI D B, FAÇANHA A R. Chemical composition and bioactivity properties of size-fractions separated from a vermicompost humic acid. Chemosphere, 2010, 78(4):457-466. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2009.10.018. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2009.10.018
[29]	CANELLAS L P, DOBBSS L B, OLIVEIRA A L, CHAGAS J G, AGUIAR N O, RUMJANEK V M, NOVOTNY E H, OLIVARES F L, SPACCINI R, PICCOLO A. Chemical properties of humic matter as related to induction of plant lateral roots. European Journal of Soil Science, 2012, 63(3):315-324. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2389.2012.01439.x. doi: 10.1111/ejss.2012.63.issue-3
[30]	HERDER G D, VAN ISTERDAEL G, BEECKMAN T, DE SMET I. The roots of a new green revolution. Trends in Plant Science, 2010, 15(11):600-607. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2010.08.009. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2010.08.009

处理 Treatment		根鲜重 Root fresh weight (g)	根干重 Root dry weight (g)	地上部干重 Shoot dry weight (g)
CK	CK-左对照侧 CK-C₁	6.0±0.5 d	1.3±0.0 d	1.8±0.1 d
CK	CK-右对照侧 CK-C₂	6.2±0.4 d	1.2±0.1 d	1.8±0.1 d
HA	HA-未施侧 HA-C	9.0±0.7 b	1.5±0.2 c	2.3±0.1 b
HA	HA-施用侧 HA-T	9.4±0.7 b	2.0±0.2 b	2.3±0.1 b
OHA3	OHA3-未施侧 OHA3-C	7.7±0.5 c	1.5±0.2 c	2.1±0.2 c
OHA3	OHA3-施用侧 OHA3-T	7.5±0.5 c	1.6±0.2 c	2.1±0.2 c
OHA6	OHA6-未施侧 OHA6-C	7.1±0.7 c	1.8±0.2 b	2.5±0.2 a
OHA6	OHA6-施用侧 OHA6-T	11.0±1.0 a	2.3±0.2 a	2.5±0.2 a

处理 Treatment	TTC还原强度 Root activity (mg·g^-1·h^-1)	TTC还原总量 Root TTC reducing amount (mg·h^-1)
CK-左对照侧 CK-C₁	1.8±0.1 e	10.8±1.3 e
CK-右对照侧 CK-C₂	1.8±0.1 e	10.9±0.6 e
HA-未施侧 HA-C	2.8±0.2 b	24.7±1.8 b
HA-施用侧 HA-T	2.8±0.2 b	26.7±2.1 b
OHA3-未施侧 OHA3-C	2.2±0.2 d	17.3±2.1 d
OHA3-施用侧 OHA3-T	2.4±0.2 c	18.9±1.8 cd
OHA6-未施侧 OHA6-C	2.9±0.2 b	20.5±1.5 c
OHA6-施用侧 OHA6-T	3.1±0.2 a	34.6±4.0 a

处理 Treatment	根体积 Root volume (cm³)	根表面积 Root surface area (cm²)	根平均直径 Average root diameter (mm)
CK-左对照侧 CK-C₁	1.4±0.1 d	37.4±4.0 d	0.39±0.04 c
CK-右对照侧 CK-C₂	1.3±0.1 d	38.5±3.9 cd	0.41±0.03 bc
HA-未施侧 HA-C	2.1±0.4 b	41.1±2.9 cd	0.45±0.04 b
HA-施用侧 HA-T	2.2±0.1 ab	52.5±3.7 b	0.44±0.04 b
OHA3-未施侧 OHA3-C	1.5±0.1 cd	39.8±3.3 cd	0.4±0.02 c
OHA3-施用侧 OHA3-T	1.7±0.2 c	42.3±2.6 c	0.44±0.02 b
OHA6-未施侧 OHA6-C	2.0±0.2 b	48.8±5.0 b	0.43±0.03 bc
OHA6-施用侧 OHA6-T	2.4±0.2 a	58.4±5.1 a	0.54±0.04 a

处理 Treatment	总根长 Total root length (cm)	主根长 Main root length (cm)	侧根长 Lateral root length (cm)
CK-对照侧 CK-C₁	627.7±62.1 e	153.9±15.9 e	473.8±59.1 e
CK-对照侧 CK-C₂	636.5±42.8 e	156.9±6.4 e	479.7±48.6 e
HA-未施侧 HA-C	905.4±83.2 c	203.8±15.5 bc	701.6±86.8 cd
HA-施用侧 HA-T	1068.9±65.0 b	212.1±23.9 ab	856.8±83.0 b
OHA3-未施侧 OHA3-C	805.4±69.2 d	164.6±10.9 e	640.8±69.4 d
OHA3-施用侧 OHA3-T	917.7±131.2 c	172.6±24.3 de	745.1±121.2 c
OHA6-未施侧 OHA6-C	958.2±90.9 c	187.6±10.9 cd	770.6±92.2 bc
OHA6-施用侧 OHA6-T	1213.9±93.2 a	227.4±17.3 a	986.5±104.3 a

处理 Treatment	总根数 Total number of root	主根数 Number of main root	侧根数 Number of lateral root
CK-对照侧 CK-C₁	296.0±13.5 e	4.0±0.6 b	95.5±13.7 e
CK-对照侧 CK-C₂	302.0±23.8 e	3.8±0.4 b	912.5±23.7 e
HA-未施侧 HA-C	408.2±33.8 cd	4.0±1.4 b	801.8±33.8 cd
HA-施用侧 HA-T	478.3±41.1 ab	5.2±1.8 a	1162.5±40.4 ab
OHA3-未施侧 OHA3-C	372.5±29.6 d	3.2±0.4 b	805.5±29.8 d
OHA3-施用侧 OHA3-T	424.2±42.1 c	3.7±0.5 b	827.3±42.6 c
OHA6-未施侧 OHA6-C	443.0±42.0 bc	4.2±0.4 ab	926.5±42.1 bc
OHA6-施用侧 OHA6-T	518.3±42.8 a	5.2±0.4 a	1295.5±42.8 a