本文已在中国知网网络首发，可在知网搜索、下载并阅读全文。
毛竹根系、新鲜枝叶、凋落物及土壤浸提液对浙贝母的化感作用
doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20220471
Allelopathic effects of Phyllostachys edulis extracts on Fritillaria thunbergii
-
摘要:
目的 探讨毛竹Phyllostachys edulis根系、新鲜枝叶、凋落物及土壤浸提液对浙贝母Fritillaria thunbergii的化感作用，筛选毛竹-药用植物复合经营体系的适生经济物种。 方法 选择药用植物浙贝母作为目标植物，开展不同质量浓度(0.005、0.010、0.020、0.050和0.100 kg·L−1)毛竹(根系、新鲜枝叶、凋落物和0~20 cm土壤浸提液)的化感作用试验。 结果 ①根系浸提液对浙贝母的生长性状(株高、生物量和叶面积)、光合色素(叶绿素a、叶绿素b、叶绿素a+b)和药效成分的影响表现为“低促高抑”的效应。②新鲜枝叶、凋落物和土壤浸提液对浙贝母生长性状、光合色素和药效成分表现为促进作用，提高了叶面积的同时亦可提升直射光和漫射光的吸收能力，有利于浙贝母在弱光环境下生长；浙贝母最大净光合速率、光饱和点在这3种浸提液处理下，随着浸提液质量浓度增加表现为先升高后下降，同时增加了表观量子效率，降低了光补偿点，表明毛竹浸提液改变了浙贝母对光能的利用率和光强吸收范围。③根系浸提液对浙贝母的化感综合效应最强，土壤浸提液最弱。④高质量浓度根系浸提液处理时，浙贝母丙二醛质量摩尔浓度增加，表明浙贝母受到一定的环境胁迫。 结论 浙贝母可适应除高质量浓度根系浸提液外的其他浸提液浇灌，且可提升生物量和药效成分。建议开展整地作业，清理毛竹林死根鞭，有利于浙贝母的优质生长。图1表5参20 Abstract:Objective The purpose is to explore the allelopathic effects of forest extract of Phyllostachys edulis on Fritillaria thunbergii, so as to screen the suitable economic species for compound management of Ph. edulis and medicinal plants. Method F. thunbergii was selected as the target plant to carry out the allelopathy experiments of different extracts of Ph. edulis forest (roots, fresh branches and leaves, litter and 0~20 cm soil) at different concentrations (0.005, 0.010, 0.020, 0.050 and 0.100 kg·L−1). Result (1) The effects of root extract on the growth characters (plant height, biomass and leaf area), photosynthetic pigments (chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b and chlorophyll a+b) and active medicinal components (Fritillarin A and Fritillarin B) of F. thunbergii showed promotion at lower extract concentration while inhabitation at higher concentration. (2) Fresh branches and leaves, litter and soil extracts promoted the growth traits, photosynthetic pigments and active components, increased the leaf area and absorption capacity of direct and diffuse light, which was conducive to the growth of F. thunbergii under low light condition. The maximum net photosynthetic rate and light saturation point also increased under the treatment of these three extracts, which first increased and then decreased with the increase of the extract concentration. At the same time, the apparent quantum efficiency increased and the light compensation point decreased, indicating that Ph. edulis extracts changed the utilization rate of light energy and the absorption range of light intensity. (3) The comprehensive allelopathic effect of root extract on F. thunbergii was the strongest, while that of the soil extract was the weakest. (4) The MDA content increased when the root extract was in high concentration, indicating that F. thunbergii was under certain environmental stress. Conclusion F. thunbergii can adapt to the irrigation of other extracts except root extract of high concentration, and can improve biomass and active medicinal components. Land preparation and cleaning up the dead root of Ph. edulis forest is conducive to the high-quality growth of F. thunbergii. [Ch, 1 fig. 5 tab. 20 ref.] -
Key words:
- Fritillaria thunbergii /
- photosynthesis /
- allelopathy /
- under-forest economy /
- compound management
-
图 1 毛竹不同浸提液对浙贝母抗氧化酶活性和丙二醛的影响
Figure 1 Effects of different extracts of Ph. edulis forest on the activities of antioxidant enzymes and MDA content of F. thunbergii
表 1 毛竹不同浸提液对浙贝母株高、生物量和叶面积的影响
Table 1. Effects of different extracts of Ph. edulis forest on height of F. thunbergia
浸提液 浙贝母株高 ck/cm T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/cm IR 数值/cm IR 数值/cm IR 数值/cm IR 数值/cm IR 根系 42.75±2.31c 57.93±0.86 a 0.26 53.20±3.43 b 0.20 52.27±2.75 b 0.18 43.30±0.85 c 0.01 37.78±3.12 d −0.12 新鲜枝叶 42.75±2.31 a 46.80±3.89 a 0.09 46.00±2.73 a 0.07 45.50±3.51 a 0.06 44.55±5.39 a 0.04 42.50±1.84 a −0.01 凋落物 42.75±2.31 a 44.03±3.89 a 0.03 44.47±3.42 a 0.04 42.75±6.04 a 0.00 41.58±10.41 a −0.03 38.43±6.84 a −0.10 土壤 42.75±2.31 ab 46.47±3.78 a 0.08 43.97±1.08 a 0.03 42.02±3.99 ab −0.02 38.13±4.11 b −0.11 37.90±3.65 b −0.11 浸提液 浙贝母地上生物量 ck/g T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/g IR 数值/g IR 数值/g IR 数值/g IR 数值/g IR 根系 0.85±0.03 b 1.02±0.09 a 0.17 1.09±0.11 a 0.22 1.08±0.15 a 0.21 0.81±0.03 b −0.05 0.75±0.10 b −0.12 新鲜枝叶 0.85±0.03 c 1.10±0.02 bc 0.15 1.16±0.04 ab 0.27 1.27±0.04 a 0.33 1.09±0.17 b 0.22 0.86±0.01 c 0.02 凋落物 0.85±0.03 b 0.90±0.07 b 0.05 1.04±0.10 a 0.18 0.93±0.04 b 0.09 0.90±0.02 b 0.06 0.85±0.06 b 0.00 土壤 0.85±0.03 b 0.87±0.04 b 0.02 1.15±0.06 a 0.26 0.10±0.17 ab 0.15 0.97±0.07 ab 0.12 0.87±0.04 b 0.02 浸提液 浙贝母地下生物量 ck/g T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/g IR 数值/g IR 数值/g IR 数值/g IR 数值/g IR 根系 1.16±0.20 c 1.41±0.10 bc 0.18 2.21±0.01 a 0.48 1.59±0.29 b 0.27 1.16±0.11 c 0.00 1.05±0.01 c −0.10 新鲜枝叶 1.16±0.20 a 1.29±0.06 a 0.10 1.43±0.03 a 0.19 1.46±0.36 a 0.20 1.40±0.10 a 0.17 1.34±0.07 a 0.13 凋落物 1.16±0.20 b 1.51±0.05 a 0.23 1.55±0.10 a 0.25 1.46±0.06 a 0.20 1.23±0.16 b 0.06 1.18±0.05 b 0.02 土壤 1.16±0.20 a 1.58±0.40 a 0.27 1.87±0.64 a 0.38 1.66±0.21 a 0.30 1.42±0.01 a 0.18 1.30±0.28 a 0.14 浸提液 浙贝母叶面积 ck/cm2 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/cm2 IR 数值/cm2 IR 数值/cm2 IR 数值/cm2 IR 数值/cm2 IR 根系 5.29±1.35 a 7.03±2.39 a 0.25 7.37±0.41 a 0.28 6.50±4.31 a 0.19 5.92±0.26 a 0.11 3.18±1.17 a −0.40 新鲜枝叶 5.29±1.35 a 6.21±1.16 a 0.15 7.28±2.35 a 0.27 6.08±4.20 a 0.13 5.77±1.03 a 0.08 5.60±1.72 a 0.06 凋落物 5.29±1.35 a 7.19±0.32 a 0.27 6.91±0.82 a 0.24 6.65±0.97 a 0.21 5.58±0.21 a 0.05 5.57±0.45 a 0.05 土壤 5.29±1.35 a 6.52±0.88 a 0.19 8.89±2.40 a 0.41 7.55±2.90 a 0.30 6.30±1.28 a 0.16 5.43±1.54 a 0.03 说明：同行不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P＜0.05); 表中数值为平均值±标准差 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 毛竹不同浸提液对浙贝母光合色素参数的影响
Table 2. Effects of different extracts of Ph. edulis forest on the photosynthetic pigment of F. thunbergia
浸提液 叶绿素a ck/(mg·g−1) T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1)m IR 根系 1.49±0.13 b 1.81±0.10 a 0.18 1.70±0.65 ab 0.13 1.68±0.23 ab 0.12 1.51±0.11 b 0.02 1.34±0.12 c −0.10 新鲜枝叶 1.49±0.13 d 1.76±0.02 b 0.15 1.93±0.02 a 0.23 1.63±0.02 c 0.09 1.57±0.01 cd 0.06 1.57±0.04 cd 0.05 凋落物 1.49±0.13 c 1.93±0.04 a 0.23 1.74±0.04 b 0.15 1.61±0.04 bc 0.08 1.58±0.01 bc 0.06 1.54±0.04 c 0.03 土壤 1.49±0.13 b 1.69±0.02 a 0.120 1.63±0.02 ab 0.09 1.58±0.03 ab 0.06 1.53±0.03 ab 0.05 1.55±0.06 ab 0.04 浸提液 叶绿素b ck/(mg·g−1) T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 根系 0.44±0.01 c 0.66±0.63 ab 0.34 0.75±0.54 a 0.42 0.62±0.64 ab 0.20 0.59±0.11 ab 0.26 0.50±0.06 bc 0.13 新鲜枝叶 0.44±0.01 b 0.68±0.01 a 0.36 0.73±0.01 a 0.40 0.50±0.01 b 0.13 0.47±0.01 ab 0.06 0.38±0.01 e −0.13 凋落物 0.44±0.01 c 0.75±0.02 b 0.42 0.81±0.01 a 0.46 0.47±0.01 c 0.07 0.45±0.01 c 0.03 0.43±0.01 c −0.01 土壤 0.44±0.01 c 0.67±0.01 a 0.35 0.63±0.01 a 0.31 0.53±0.01 b 0.18 0.51±0.01 bc 0.14 0.49±0.19 bc 0.12 浸提液 叶绿素a/b ck T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值 IR 数值 IR 数值 IR 数值 IR 数值 IR 根系 3.46±0.72 a 2.77±0.13 a −0.20 2.27±0.23 a −0.34 2.72±0.26 a −0.21 2.62±0.36 a −0.24 2.74±0.59 a −0.21 新鲜枝叶 3.46±0.72 ab 2.57±0.01 b −0.26 2.64±0.01 b −0.24 3.24±0.01 b −0.06 3.37±0.01 ab −0.03 4.16±0.04 a 0.12 凋落物 3.46±0.72 a 2.57±0.01 b −0.26 2.16±0.02 b −0.38 3.45±0.01 a −0.01 3.51±0.01 a 0.02 3.58±0.01 a 0.03 土壤 3.46±0.72 a 2.51±0.01 a −0.28 2.57±0.03 a −0.26 3.02±0.01 a −0.13 3.16±0.01 a −0.11 3.46±0.79 a −0.09 浸提液 叶绿素a+b ck/(mg·g−1) T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 根系 1.92±0.09 c 2.47±0.16 a 0.22 2.45±0.03 a 0.22 2.30±0.08 ab 0.16 2.10±0.21 bc 0.08 1.84±0.06 c −0.04 新鲜枝叶 1.92±0.09 e 2.44±0.02 b 0.21 2.66±0.03 a 0.28 2.13±0.02 c 0.01 2.04±0.01 d 0.06 1.95±0.04 e 0.01 凋落物 1.92±0.09 d 2.68±0.05 a 0.28 2.54±0.05 b 0.24 2.08±0.05 c 0.08 2.04±0.01 cd 0.06 1.97±0.06 cd 0.02 土壤 1.92±0.09 d 2.35±0.02 a 0.19 2.26±0.03 b 0.15 2.11±0.04 c 0.09 2.07±0.03 c 0.07 2.05±0.03 c 0.06 浸提液 类胡萝卜素 ck/(mg·g−1) T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 数值/(mg·g−1) IR 根系 0.52±0.01 a 0.63±0.04 a 0.17 0.62±0.03 a 0.16 0.60±0.04 a 0.13 0.56±0.03 a 0.06 0.55±0.01 a 0.05 新鲜枝叶 0.52±0.01 b 0.60±0.01 a 0.13 0.59±0.01 a 0.12 0.53±0.01 b 0.02 0.45±0.01 c −0.15 0.43±0.01 c −0.17 凋落物 0.52±0.01 b 0.61±0.01 a 0.14 0.59±0.01 a 0.12 0.52±0.01 b −0.01 0.50±0.01 b −0.05 0.47±0.02 c −0.10 土壤 0.52±0.01 d 0.61±0.01 a 0.14 0.59±0.01 b 0.12 0.54±0.01 c 0.03 0.48±0.01 e −0.08 0.44±0.01 f −0.15 说明：同行不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P＜0.05); 表中数值为平均值±标准差
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 毛竹不同浸提液对浙贝母光响应特征参数的影响
Table 3. Effects of different extracts of Ph. edulis forest on photoresponse characteristic parameters of F. thunbergii
浸提液 表观量子效率 ck T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值 IR 数值 IR 数值 IR 数值 IR 数值 IR 根系 0.048±0.013 de 0.071±0.005 b 0.324 0.065±0.008 cd 0.262 0.063±0.004 cd 0.238 0.049±0.004 e 0.020 0.096±0.010 a 0.500 新鲜枝叶 0.048±0.013 a 0.067±0.011 a 0.284 0.067±0.009 a 0.284 0.059±0.004 a 0.186 0.050±0.003 a 0.040 0.053±0.004 a 0.094 凋落物 0.048±0.013 b 0.054±0.008 b 0.111 0.084±0.012 a 0.429 0.072±0.011 ab 0.333 0.053±0.006 b 0.094 0.059±0.011 b 0.186 土壤 0.048±0.013 a 0.074±0.026 a 0.351 0.062±0.006 a 0.226 0.053±0.007 a 0.094 0.054±0.007 a 0.111 0.050±0.008 a 0.040 浸提液 最大净光合速率 ck/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 根系 4.31±0.83 c 7.31±1.06 b 0.41 8.83±1.99 b 0.51 9.02±2.41 a 0.55 10.57±2.01 ab 0.59 3.99±0.68 c −0.08 新鲜枝叶 4.31±0.83 a 6.65±1.04 a 0.35 7.15±2.31 a 0.40 6.19±1.65 a 0.30 4.49±0.67 a 0.04 4.68±1.01 a 0.08 凋落物 4.31±0.83 b 6.52±0.42 a 0.34 6.52±0.82 a 0.34 5.32±1.21 ab 0.19 4.51±0.70 b 0.04 5.48±1.12 ab 0.21 土壤 4.31±0.83 a 4.92±0.61 a 0.12 4.78±0.59 a 0.10 4.763±0.52 a 0.10 4.58±0.66 a 0.06 4.52±0.70 a 0.05 浸提液 光饱和点 ck/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 根系 110.67±10.00 c 116.92±16.63 bc 0.05 151.25±19.04 b 0.27 240.38±26.52 a 0.54 236.20±23.33 a 0.53 51.97±7.26 d −0.53 新鲜枝叶 110.67±10.00 a 114.18±12.30 a 0.03 121.60±16.16 a 0.09 121.81±20.48 a 0.09 109.84±12.00 a −0.01 107.09±12.52 a −0.03 凋落物 110.67±10.00 b 139.20±13.21 a 0.21 89.50±8.01 c −0.19 87.79±10.36 c −0.21 97.23±9.27 c −0.12 109.78±12.84 bc −0.01 土壤 110.67±10.00 a 80.00±7.32 b −0.23 93.23±10.25 ab −0.16 108.74±11.00 a −0.02 103.30±9.40 a −0.07 110.44±6.55 a −0.00 浸提液 光补偿点 ck/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 数值/
(μmol·m−2·s−1)IR 根系 20.88±4.22 a 14.09±3.26 ab −0.32 15.38±3.02 ab −0.26 17.86±4.63 ab −0.14 20.41±4.10 a −0.02 10.42±2.15 b −0.50 新鲜枝叶 20.88±4.22 a 14.91±2.11 a −0.28 14.92±2.69 a −0.28 16.95±1.65 a −0.19 20.00±3.21 a −0.04 18.87±2.91 a −0.09 凋落物 20.88±4.22 a 18.52±2.08 a −0.11 11.91±0.67 b −0.43 13.89±1.33 b −0.33 18.86±0.90 a −0.09 16.95±2.15 ab −0.19 土壤 20.88±4.22a 13.51±1.90 b −0.35 16.13±1.44 ab −0.23 18.70±2.61 a −0.09 18.52±1.55 a −0.11 20.00±2.71 a −0.04 说明：同行不同小写字母表示处理间差异显著(P＜0.05); 表中数值为平均值±标准差
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 毛竹不同浸提液对浙贝母的综合化感效应
Table 4. Synthesis effects of different extracts of Ph. edulis forest on F. thunbergia
处理 不同浸提液的综合化感效应指数 处理 不同浸提液的综合化感效应指数 根系 新鲜枝叶 凋落物 土壤 根系 新鲜枝叶 凋落物 土壤 T1 0.136 0.106 0.148 0.035 T4 0.104 0.039 0.020 0.041 T2 0.200 0.154 0.106 0.107 T5 −0.108 0.011 0.016 0.016 T3 0.180 0.102 0.053 0.081 平均值 0.103 0.082 0.069 0.056
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 毛竹不同浸提液对贝母素甲和贝母素乙质量分数的影响
Table 5. Effects of different extracts of Ph. edulis forest on the contents of fritillarin A and fritillarin B
浸提液 贝母素甲/(mg·kg−1) ck T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 根系 65.15±1.84 b 87.15±1.53 a 88.77±0.27 a 58.30±0.30 c 40.12±0.12 d 39.79±3.29 d 新鲜枝叶 65.15±1.84 d 95.56±1.06 b 108.58±3.58 a 86.99±1.99 b 82.75±0.25 c 71.76±1.26 d 凋落物 65.15±1.84 e 113.94±3.00 a 91.22±1.22 b 87.75±0.25 c 83.26±0.26 d 81.89±1.35 d 土壤 65.15±1.84 d 95.21±3.01 bc 100.56±0.51 a 96.65±1.50 b 92.78±0.50 c 91.57±1.40 c 浸提液 不同处理下贝母素乙/(mg·kg−1) ck T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 根系 29.10±1.10 b 41.93±0.40 a 42.15±0.15 a 27.92±0.60 b 22.45±2.20 c 16.70±1.20 d 新鲜枝叶 29.10±1.10 d 47.33±0.30 b 62.34±2.04 a 46.23±1.02 b 40.15±0.15 b 35.13±0.10 c 凋落物 29.10±1.10 c 45.45±1.30 a 43.47±3.40 a 39.07±1.07 b 38.42±1.96 b 38.04±1.04 b 土壤 29.10±1.10 d 41.75±1.50 b 52.23±2.20 a 51.88±1.50 a 40.26±0.20 b 38.41±1.20 c
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] QIN Fangcuo, LIU Shu, YU Shixiao. Effects of allelopathy and competition for water and nutrients on survival and growth of tree species in Eucalyptus urophylla plantations [J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2018, 424(15): 387 − 395. [2] INDERJIT, WARDLE D, KARBAN R, et al. The ecosystem and evolutionary contexts of allelopathy [J]. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 2011, 26(12): 655 − 663. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2011.08.003 [3] HU Lingfei, ROBERT C A M, CADOT S, et al. Root exudate metabolites drive plant-soil feedbacks on growth and defense by shaping the rhizosphere microbiota [J/OL]. Nature Communications, 2018, 9: 2738[2022-06-07]. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-05122-7. [4] BONANOM G, ZOTTI M G, IDBELLA M, et al. Microbiota modulation of allelopathy depends on litter chemistry: mitigation or exacerbation? [J/OL]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 776: 145942[2022-06-17]. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145942. [5] 陈娟, 白尚斌, 周国模, 等. 毛竹浸提液对苦槠幼苗生长的化感效应[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34(16): 4499 − 4507. CHEN Juan, BAI Shangbin, ZHOU Guomo, et al. Allelopathic effects of Phyllostachys edulis extracts on Castanopsis sclerophylla [J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2014, 34(16): 4499 − 4507. [6] 刘姚姚, 张瑞, 沈晓飞, 等. 毛竹林不同浸提液对浙江楠幼苗生长的影响研究[J]. 西部林业科学, 2020, 49(3): 99 − 108. doi: 10.16473/j.cnki.xblykx1972.2020.03.016 LIU Yaoyao, ZHANG Rui, SHEN Xiaofei, et al. Study on the effects of different extracts from Phyllostachys edulis forest on the growth of Phoebe chekiangensis seedlings [J]. Journal of West China Forestry Science, 2020, 49(3): 99 − 108. doi: 10.16473/j.cnki.xblykx1972.2020.03.016 [7] 张瑞, 詹卉, 刘姚姚, 等. 毛竹林不同浸提液对延胡索生长指标和光合特征的影响[J]. 西南林业大学学报(自然科学), 2020, 40(3): 59 − 67. ZHANG Rui, ZHAN Hui, LIU Yaoyao, et al. Effects of different extracts from Phyllostachys edulis on the growth index and photosynthesis characteristics of Corydalis yanhusuo [J]. Journal of Southwest Forestry University (Natural Sciences) , 2020, 40(3): 59 − 67. [8] 李欣欣, 赖金莉, 岳建华, 等. 毛竹各器官和根际土浸提液对杉木种子萌发的化感作用[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(22): 8149 − 8157. LI Xinxin, LAI Jinli, YUE Jianyue, et al. Allelopathy of Phyllostachys pubescens extract on the seed germination of Chinese fir [J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(22): 8149 − 8157. [9] 徐琳煜, 刘守赞, 白岩, 等. 不同光强处理对三叶青光合特性的影响[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2018, 35(3): 467 − 475. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2018.03.010 XU Linyu, LIU Shouzan, BAI Yan, et al. Effects of light intensity treatments on photosynthetic characteristics in Tetrastigma hemsleyanum [J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2018, 35(3): 467 − 475. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2018.03.010 [10] 王文文, 杨飞, 杨中, 等. 超高效液相色谱-串联质谱法分析贝母药材中5种生物碱[J]. 分析测试学报, 2019, 38(4): 461 − 465. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4957.2019.04.014 WANG Wenwen, YANG Fei, YANG Zhong, et al. Determination of 5 alkaloids in Fritillaria by ultrahigh performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry [J]. Journal of Instrumental Analysis, 2019, 38(4): 461 − 465. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4957.2019.04.014 [11] 车朋, 刘久石, 齐耀东, 等. UPLC-ELSD同时测定贝母类药材中6种生物碱的含量[J]. 中国中药杂志, 2020, 45(6): 1393 − 1398. doi: 10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.20191223.201 CHE Peng, LIU Jiushi, QI Yaodong, et al. Simultaneous determination of six major isosteroidal alkaloids in Beimu by UPLC-ELSD [J]. China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica, 2020, 45(6): 1393 − 1398. doi: 10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.20191223.201 [12] WILLIAMSON G B, RICHARDSON D. Bioassays for allelopathy: measuring treatment responses with independent controls [J]. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 1988, 14(1): 181 − 187. doi: 10.1007/BF01022540 [13] 曾任森. 化感作用研究中的生物测定方法综述[J]. 应用生态学报, 1999, 10(1): 125 − 128. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-9332.1999.01.031 ZENG Renseng. Review on bioassay methods for allelopathy research [J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 1999, 10(1): 125 − 128. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-9332.1999.01.031 [14] INDERJIT. Soil microorganisms: an important determinant of allelopathic activity [J]. Plant and Soil, 2005, 274(1): 227 − 236. [15] DAI Zhicong, WANG Xiaoying, QI Shanshan, et al. Effects of leaf litter on inter-specific competitive ability of the invasive plant Wedelia trilobata [J]. Ecological Research, 2016, 31(3): 367 − 374. doi: 10.1007/s11284-016-1344-0 [16] 黄永杰, 周会, 张丹丹, 等. 水花生及其根际土浸提液对马尼拉幼苗生长生理特性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2015, 29(1): 285 − 291. doi: 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2015.01.054 HUANG Yongjie, ZHOU Hui, ZHANG Dandan, et al. Effects of extracts of Alternanthera philoxeroides and rhizospheric soil on growth and physiological characteristics of Zoysia matrella seedlings [J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2015, 29(1): 285 − 291. doi: 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2015.01.054 [17] 阎飞, 杨振明, 韩丽梅. 植物化感作用(Allelopathy)及其作用物的研究方法[J]. 生态学报, 2000, 20(4): 692 − 696. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2000.04.029 YAN Fei, YANG Zenming, HAN Limei. Review on research methods for allelopathy and allelochemicals in plants [J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2000, 20(4): 692 − 696. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2000.04.029 [18] WU Di, CHEN Jianyang, LU Baiyi, et al. Application of near infrared spectroscopy for the rapid determination of antioxidant activity of bamboo leaf extract [J]. Food Chemistry, 2012, 135: 2147 − 2156. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2012.07.011 [19] 刘云芬, 王薇薇, 祖艳侠, 等. 过氧化氢酶在植物抗逆中的研究进展[J]. 大麦与谷类科学, 2019, 36(1): 5 − 8. doi: 10.14069/j.cnki.32-1769/s.2019.01.002 LIU Yunfen, WANG Weiwei, ZU Yanxia, et al. Research progress on the effects of catalase on plant stress tolerance [J]. Barley and Cereal Sciences, 2019, 36(1): 5 − 8. doi: 10.14069/j.cnki.32-1769/s.2019.01.002 [20] 陈昱, 张福建, 杨有新, 等. 芥菜浸提液对豇豆连作土壤性质及幼苗生理指标的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2019, 33(5): 1038 − 1047. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2019.05.1038 CHEN Yi, ZHANG Fujian, YANG Youxin, et al. Effect of aqueous extract of mustard on soil properties of the continuous cropping cowpea and seedling physiological indexes [J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 33(5): 1038 − 1047. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2019.05.1038 -
-
链接本文:
https://zlxb.zafu.edu.cn/article/doi/10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20220471
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 46
- 被引次数: 0
