Response of Fine Root Distribution and Hydraulic Characteristics of Apple to Long-term Plastic Mulching in Dryland of Northwest China

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2021.07.006

Ecology and Environment ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (7): 1375-1385.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2021.07.006

• Research Articles • Previous Articles Next Articles

Response of Fine Root Distribution and Hydraulic Characteristics of Apple to Long-term Plastic Mulching in Dryland of Northwest China

SUN Wentai^*(), MA Ming, DONG Tie, NIU Junqiang, YIN Xiaoning, LIU Xinglu

Institute of Forestry, Fruits and Floriculture, Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou 730070, China

Received:2021-02-17 Online:2021-07-18 Published:2021-10-09
Contact: SUN Wentai

西北旱地苹果细根分布及水力特征对长期覆膜的响应

孙文泰^*(), 马明, 董铁, 牛军强, 尹晓宁, 刘兴禄

甘肃省农业科学院林果花卉研究所,甘肃兰州 730070

通讯作者: 孙文泰
作者简介:孙文泰,（1983年生）,女,副研究员,硕士,主要从事果树与逆境生态研究。E-mail: swt830312@126.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(31760555);财政部和农业农村部：国家现代农业产业技术体系(CARS-27);农业部西北地区果树科学观测试验站(S-10-18)

Abstract

Abstract:

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of long-term measures of plastic film mulching and soil moisture conservation on the morphology, configuration, anatomical characters and soil physical structure of apple fine roots in the rain-fed agricultural area of the dry highland of Longdong. Eighteenth years old apple trees [‘Nagano Fuji No.2’apple/M. baccata (L.) crab apple] were used as materials. The root spatial distribution of clear tillage (CK), film-mulching for two years (2Y), film-mulching for four years (4Y), film-mulching for six years (6Y) were systematically investigated by soil profile method. The fine root biomass, root length, surface area, number of branches, diameter of tubes and number of tubes were measured, and the hydraulic characteristics of roots were calculated. The water content, bulk density, porosity, soil texture and compaction density of surface soil (0-20 cm) and subsurface soil (20-40 cm) were measured and analyzed. The effects of long-term film mulching on the physical properties of surface soil and subsurface soil and the stability of soil structure were investigated. To explore the spatial heterogeneity of the growth distribution, anatomical structure and hydraulic conductivity of fine roots with plastic film for different mulching years. In addition, principal component analysis was used to extract the main factors affecting the hydraulic characteristics of fine roots and explore the adjustment of fine root growth adaptation strategy in response to the physical degradation of rhizosphere soil. The results showed that: (1) Film mulching promoted the deposition of clay particles and physical clay particles in the subsurface soil, which were 102.29%, 101.64%, 102.72%, 115.64%, 115.58%, 114.21% of the surface soil, respectively, resulting in the increase of bulk density and compaction density, the decrease of effective pores (capillary porosity, ventilation), and the poor structure of the subsurface soil. (2) Mulching increased the biomass accumulation and absorption function expression of fine roots in surface soil (0-20 cm) by promoting branching, inhibited the distribution of fine roots in subsurface soil (20-40 cm), and decreased root activity. With the increase of the mulching years, the root weakening coefficient decreased, which showed that the concentrated distribution layer of root increased gradually, and 6Y treatment was the most significant (P<0.05), 50% of the roots were concentrated in the soil layer of 20.47 cm. (3) There was a significant correlation between the anatomical structure of fine roots covered with short-term film mulching (2Y) and soil moisture content, forming fine roots with smaller diameter and developed drainage tissue. The strategies of rapid water absorption, water transport and extensive water use were adopted to increase the diameter of tubes and improve the water conduction efficiency, and the distribution range of fine roots was effectively expanded to improve the utilization of resources. And (4) with the increased of the number of years of film mulching, there was not correlation between the anatomical structure of fine roots and the soil water content, and the correlation between the anatomical structure of fine roots and the soil physical properties increased. The subsurface soil of 6Y showed “recessive” degradation, and fine roots gave priority to regulating the stress resistance, water transport safety and effectiveness, and then changed the axial water transport capacity to regulate the expression of hydraulic characteristics. The fine roots with larger inner diameter and thickness of the pipe wall were formed, and conservative water use strategies were adopted to increase the water transport safety. It promoted root growth in surface soil, decreased inner diameter and wall thickness of pipes, and formed a “intensive” root network with large root lengths and vigorous branches.

Key words: film-mulching, fine roots, vessel element, anatomic structure, hydraulic characteristics, principal component analysis

摘要：

为探明陇东旱塬雨养农业区长期覆膜保墒措施对苹果细根形态、构型、解剖性状、土壤物理结构的影响,以18 a（长富2号/山定子）为试材,采用土壤剖面法系统调查清耕（CK）、覆膜2 a（2Y）、覆膜4 a（4Y）、覆膜6 a（6Y）根系空间分布,并对细根生物量、根长、表面积、分支数、导管直径、导管数量等进行测定,对根系水力特征指标进行计算,同时对表层土壤（0—20 cm）、亚表层土壤（20—40 cm）的含水量、容重、孔隙度、土壤质地、压实密度等进行测定、分析,探索不同覆膜年限细根生长分布、解剖结构、水力输导能力的空间异质性;并采用主成分分析,提取覆膜影响细根水力特征的主要因子,探索应对根际土壤物理退化的苹果细根生长适应策略调整。结果表明,（1）覆膜促进黏粒、物理性黏粒在亚表层土壤中的沉积,分别为表层土壤的102.29%、101.64%、102.72%,115.64%、115.58%、114.21%,导致容重、压实密度升高,有效孔隙（毛管孔隙、通气度）降低,亚表层土壤呈现不良结构。（2）覆膜处理以促进分支的方式提高表层土壤（0—20 cm）细根生物量积累、吸收功能表达,抑制亚表层土壤（20—40 cm）细根分布,并降低根系活力。随着覆膜年限的增长,根系削弱系数下降,表现为根系集中分布层逐渐上升,以6Y处理最为显著（P<0.05）,50%根系集中分布于20.47 cm土层范围内。（3）短期覆膜（2Y）细根解剖结构与土壤水分含量呈极显著相关,形成较小直径、发达疏导组织的细根,采取增大导管管径、提升导水效率的快速吸水、输水、粗放式用水策略,并有效拓展细根分布范围,提高资源利用率。（4）随覆膜年限增加,细根解剖结构与土壤含水量无显著相关,与土壤物理特性的相关性增大。6Y亚表层土壤呈“隐性”退化,细根优先调节抗逆能力、输水安全性与有效性,而后改变轴向输水能力,以调节水力特征表达。形成导管内径、管壁厚度较大的细根,采取增大输水安全性的保守型用水策略。促进表层土壤根系生长,降低导管内径、管壁厚度,较大根长与旺盛分支形成“密集型”根系网络。

关键词: 覆膜, 细根, 导管分子, 解剖结构, 水力特征, 主成分分析

CLC Number:

S661.1
X17

SUN Wentai, MA Ming, DONG Tie, NIU Junqiang, YIN Xiaoning, LIU Xinglu. Response of Fine Root Distribution and Hydraulic Characteristics of Apple to Long-term Plastic Mulching in Dryland of Northwest China[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2021, 30(7): 1375-1385.

孙文泰, 马明, 董铁, 牛军强, 尹晓宁, 刘兴禄. 西北旱地苹果细根分布及水力特征对长期覆膜的响应[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(7): 1375-1385.

Figures/Tables 12

References 43

[1]	CARLQUIST S, 1985. Wood anatomy of coriariaceae:Phyloge-netic and ecological implications[J]. Systematic Botany, 10(2): 174-183. DOI URL
[2]	CHEN X L, WU P T, ZHAO X N, et al., 2013. Effect of different mulches on harvested rainfall use efficiency for corn (Zea mays L.) in semi-arid regions of northwest China[J]. Arid Land Research and Management, 27(3): 272-285. DOI URL
[3]	CHOAT B, BRODRIBB T J, BRODERSEN C R, et al., 2018. Triggers of tree mortality under drought[J]. Nature, 558: 531-539. DOI URL
[4]	GALE M R, GRIGAL D F, 1987. Vertical root distributions of northern tree species in relation to successional status[J]. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 17(8): 829-834. DOI URL
[5]	GEBAUER R, VOLARIK D, et al., 2013. Root hydraulic conductivity and vessel structure modification with; increasing soil depth of two oak species: Quercus pubescens and Quercus robur[J]. Trees-Struct Funct, 27(3): 523-531. DOI URL
[6]	GLEASON S M, WESTOBY M, JANSEN S, et al., 2016. Weak trade-off between xylem safety and xylem-specific hydraulic efficiency across the world’s woody plant species[J]. New Phytologist, 209(1): 123-136. DOI URL
[7]	HACKE U G, SPICER R, SCHREIBER S G, et al., 2016. An ecophysiological and developmental perspective on variation in vessel diameter[J]. Plant Cell Environ, 40(6): 831-845. DOI URL
[8]	KONG X P, ZHANG M L, DE S I, et al., 2014. Designer crops: Optimal root system architecture for nutrient acquisition[J]. Trends in Biotechnology, 32(12): 597-598. DOI URL
[9]	LARTER M, PFAUTSCH S, DOMEC J, et al., 2017. Aridity drove the evolution of extreme embolism resistance and the radiation of conifer genus Callitris[J]. New Phytologist, 215(1): 97-112. DOI URL
[10]	MARTRE P, DURAND J L, COCHARD H, 2010. Changes in axial hydraulic conductivity along elongating leaf blades in relation to xylem maturation in tall fescue[J]. New Phytol, 146(2): 235-247. DOI URL
[11]	MELVINT T, FRANK W, 1991. The hydraulic architecture of trees and other woody plants[J]. New Phytologist, 119(34): 345-360. DOI URL
[12]	PATE J S, JESCHKE W D, AYLWARD M J, 1995. Hydraulic architecture and xylem structure of the dimorphic root systems of south-west australian species of proteaceae[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 46(8): 907-915. DOI URL
[13]	GEBAUER R, VOLAŘÍK D, 2013. Root hydraulic conductivity and vessel structure modiﬁcation with increasing soil depth of two oak species Quercus pubescens and Quercus robur[J]. Trees, 27(3): 523-531. DOI URL
[14]	ROUMET C, BIROUSTE M, PICON C C, et al., 2016. Root structure-function relationships in 74 species: Evidence of a root economics spectrum related to carbon economy[J]. New Phytologist, 210: 815-826. DOI URL
[15]	TYREE M T, ZIMMERMANN M H, 2002. Xylem structure and the ascent of sap[J]. Quarterly Review of Biology, 222(4623): 500.
[16]	ZADWORNY M, COMAS L H, EISSENSTAT D M, 2018. Linking fine root morphology, hydraulic functioning and shade tolerance of trees[J]. Annals of Botany, 122(2): 239-250. DOI URL
[17]	郭京衡, 曾凡江, 李尝君, 等, 2014. 塔克拉玛干沙漠南缘三种防护林植物根系构型及其生态适应策略[J]. 植物生态学报, 38(1): 36-44. DOI
	GUO J H, ZENG F J, LI C J, et al., 2014. Root architecture and ecological adaptation strategies in three shelterbelt plant species in the southern Taklimakan Desert[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 38(1): 36-44. DOI URL
[18]	靳乐乐, 乔匀周, 董宝娣, 等, 2019. 起垄覆膜栽培技术的增产增效作用与发展[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 27(9): 1364-1374.
	JIN L L, QIAO Y H, DONG B D, et al., 2019. Crop yield increasing and efficiency improving effects and development of technology of ridge-furrow cultivation with plastic film mulching[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 27(9): 1364-1374.
[19]	李合生, 2000. 植物生理生化实验原理与技术[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社.
	LI H S, 2000. Experimental principle and technique for plant physiology and biochemistry[M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press.
[20]	李佳旸, 王延平, 韩明玉, 等, 2017. 陕北黄土丘陵区山地苹果园的土壤水分动态研究[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 25(5): 749-758.
	LI J Y, WANG Y P, HAN M Y, et al., 2017. Soil moisture dynamics of apple orchards in Loess Hilly Area of northern Shaanxi Province[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 25(5): 749-758.
[21]	李颖华, 田淑芬, 马闯, 等, 2021. 不同品种葡萄根系解剖结构及其水力特性分析[J]. 果树学报, 38(5): 714-724.
	LI Y H, TIAN S F, MA C, et al., 2021. Analysis on root anatomical structure and hydraulic characteristics in different grape varieties[J]. Journal of Fruit Science, 38(5): 714-724.
[22]	吕洁婷, 2017. 秸秆还田与地膜覆盖对土壤理化性状影响[D]. 兰州:兰州大学.
	LV J T, 2017. Effects of straw incorporation and plastic film mulch on soil physicochemical properties[D]. Lanzhou: Lanzhou University.
[23]	刘洪凯, 陈旭, 张明忠, 等, 2020. 鲁中丘陵山地干旱生境上11个树种的细根解剖特征与耐旱策略[J]. 林业科学, 56(7): 185-193.
	LIU H K, CHEN X, ZHANG M Z, et al., 2020. Anatomical characteristics of fine roots of 11 tree species in the hilly mountainous areas in central Shandong province and their drought resistance strategies[J]. Scienta Silvae Sinicae, 56(7): 185-193.
[24]	刘均阳, 周正朝, 苏雪萌, 2020. 植物根系对土壤团聚体形成作用机制研究回顾[J]. 水土保持学报, 34(3): 267-273.
	LIU J Y, ZHOU Z C, SU X M, 2020. Review of the mechanism of root system on the formation of soil aggregates[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Consercation, 34(3): 267-273.
[25]	马雄忠, 王新平, 2020. 阿拉善高原2种荒漠植物根系构型及生态适应性特征[J]. 生态学报, 40(17): 6001-6008.
	MA X Z, WANG X P, 2020. Root architecture and adaptive strategy of two desert plants in the Alxa Plateau[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 40(17): 6001-6008.
[26]	卜玉山, 邵海林, 王建程, 等, 2010. 秸秆与地膜覆盖春玉米和春小麦耕层土壤碳氮动态[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 18(2): 322-326.
	BU Y S, SHAO H L, WANG J C, et al., 2010. Dynamics of soil carbon and nitrogen in plowed layer of spring corn and spring wheat fields mulched with straw and plastic film[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 18(2): 322-326. DOI URL
[27]	石宗琳, 王加旭, 梁化学, 等, 2017. 渭北不同园龄苹果园土壤团聚体状况及演变趋势研究[J]. 土壤学报, 54(2): 387-399.
	SHI Z L, WANG J X, LIANG H X, et al., 2017. Status and evolution of soil aggregates in apple orchards different in age in Weibei[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 54(2): 387-399.
[28]	宋清华, 赵成章, 史元春, 等, 2015. 不同坡向甘肃臭草根系分叉数和连接长度的权衡关系[J]. 植物生态学报, 39(6): 577-585. DOI
	SONG Q H, ZHAO C Z, SHI Y C, et al., 2015. Trade-off between root forks and link length of Melica przewalskyi on different aspects of slopes[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 39(6): 577-585. DOI URL
[29]	苏一鸣, 2015. 黄土高原旱地苹果园起垄覆膜垄沟覆草技术研究[D]. 杨陵: 西北农林科技大学.
	SU Y M, 2015. Ridge film mulching combined straw mulvhing technology for arid apple orchad of the Loess Plateau[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University.
[30]	孙文泰, 刘兴禄, 董铁, 等, 2015. 陇东旱塬苹果园不同覆盖措施对土壤性状、根系分布和果实品质的影响[J]. 果树学报, 32(5): 841-851.
	SUN W T, LIU X L, DONG T, et al., 2015. Root distribution, soil characteristics, root distribution and fruit quality affected by different mulching measures in apple orchard in the dry area of eastern Gansu[J]. Journal of Fruit Science, 32(5): 841-851.
[31]	孙文泰, 马明, 董铁, 等, 2016. 陇东旱塬苹果根系分布规律及生理特性对地表覆盖的响应[J]. 应用生态学报, 27(10): 3153-3163.
	SUN W T, MA M, DONG T, et al., 2016. Response of distribution pattern and physiological characteristics of apple roots grown in the dry area of eastern Gansu to ground mulching[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 27(10): 3153-3163.
[32]	汪攀, 陈奶莲, 邹显花, 等, 2015. 植物根系解剖结构对逆境胁迫响应的研究进展[J]. 生态学杂志, 34(2): 550-556.
	WANG P, CHEN N L, ZOU X H, et al., 2015. Research progress on adaptive responses of anatomical structure of plant roots to stress[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 34(2): 550-556.
[33]	王亚楠, 2019. 6个温带树种吸收根生物量和根长密度季节动态研究[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北林业大学.
	WANG Y N, 2019. Seasonal dynamics of absorptive fine root biomass and length density in six temperate tree species[D]. Haerbin: Northeast Forestry University.
[34]	魏彬萌, 李忠徽, 王益权, 2021. 渭北旱塬苹果园土壤紧实化现状及成因[J]. 应用生态学报, 32(3): 976-982.
	WEI B M, LI Z H, WANG Y Q, 2021. Status and causes of soil compaction at apple orchards in the Weibei Dry Highland, northwest China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 32(3): 976-982.
[35]	徐佳星, 封涌涛, 叶玉莲, 等, 2020. 地膜覆盖条件下黄土高原玉米产量及水分利用效应分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 53(12): 2349-2359.
	XU J X, FENG Y T, YE Y L, et al., 2020. Effects of plastic film mulching on yield and water use of maize in the Loess Plateau[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 53(12): 2349-2359.
[36]	徐立清, 崔东海, 王庆成, 等, 2020. 张广才岭西坡次生林不同生境胡桃楸幼树根系构型及细根特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 31(2): 373-380.
	XU L Q, CUI D H, WANG Q C, et al., 2020. Root architecture and fine root characteristics of Juglans mandshurica saplings in different habitats in the secondary forest on the west slope of Zhangguangcailing China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 31(2): 373-380.
[37]	徐茜, 陈亚宁, 2012. 胡杨茎木质部解剖结构与水力特性对干旱胁迫处理的响应[J]. 中国农业生态学报, 20(8): 1059-1065.
	XU Q, CHEN Y N, 2012. Response of anatomy and hydraulic characteristics of xylem stem of Populus euphratica Oliv. to drought stress[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 20(8): 1059-1065. DOI URL
[38]	张翠梅, 师尚礼, 刘珍, 等, 2019. 干旱胁迫对不同抗旱性苜蓿品种根系形态及解剖结构的影响[J]. 草业学报, 28(5): 79-89.
	ZHANG C M, SHI S L, LIU Z, et al., 2019. Effects of drought stress on the root morphology and anatomical structure of alfalfa (Medicago satica) varieties with differing drought-tolerance[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinice, 28(5): 79-89.
[39]	张国帅, 2020. 黄土高原多年生草木根部导管解剖特征[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北林业大学.
	ZHANG G S, 2020. Anatomical characteristics in roots of perennial forbs in the Loess Plateau, China[D]. Haerbin: Northeast Forestry University.
[40]	张旭东, 2019. 覆膜种植和施肥对半干旱地区资源高效利用及玉米生产持续性的影响机制[D]. 杨陵: 西北农林科技大学.
	ZHANG X D, 2019. Influencing mechanism of mulch planting and fertilization on the efficient utilization of resources and maize production sustainability in semi-arid areas[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University.
[41]	郑必昭, 郭延峰, 赵海英, 等, 2012. 玉米测土施肥不同采样时期土壤养分测试结果变化分析[J]. 中国农技推广, 38(2): 37-39.
	ZHENG B Z, GUO Y F, ZHAO D Y, et al., 2012. Analysis on the variation of soil nutrient test results in different sampling periods of maize soil testing and fertilization[J]. China Agricultural Technology Extension, 38(2): 37-39.
[42]	祝飞华, 王益权, 石宗琳, 等, 2015. 轮耕对关中一年两熟区土壤物理性状和冬小麦根系生长的影响[J]. 生态学报, 35(22): 7454-7463.
	ZHU F H, WANG Y Q, SHI Z L, et al., 2015. Effects of rotational tillage on soil physical properties and winter wheat root growth on annual double cropping area[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35(22): 7454-7463.
[43]	朱广龙, 陈许兵, IRSHAD A, 等, 2018. 酸枣根系导管结构的可塑性对自然梯度干旱生境的适应机制[J]. 土壤学报, 55(3): 764-773.
	ZHU G L, CHEN X B, IRSHAD A, et al., 2018. Mechanism of Plasticity of Root Vessel Structure of Ziziphus jujuba var. spinosa Adapting Ecotopes along a Natural Drought Gradient[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 55(3): 764-773.

指标 Indicators	20 cm	40 cm
全氮 Total nitrogen/(g∙kg^-1)	1.27	0.74
全磷 Total phosphorus/(g∙kg^-1)	1.12	0.8
全钾 Total potassium/(g∙kg^-1)	16.86	16.82
有机质 Organic matter/(g∙kg^-1)	14.69	9.57
碱解氮 Alkaline hydrolysis nitrogen/(mg∙kg^-1)	96.25	47.25
速效磷 Available P/(mg∙kg^-1)	47.3	14.7
速效钾 Available K/(mg∙kg^-1)	377.04	182.96
pH	8.35	8.85

指标 Indicators	20 cm	40 cm
全氮 Total nitrogen/(g∙kg^-1)	1.27	0.74
全磷 Total phosphorus/(g∙kg^-1)	1.12	0.8
全钾 Total potassium/(g∙kg^-1)	16.86	16.82
有机质 Organic matter/(g∙kg^-1)	14.69	9.57
碱解氮 Alkaline hydrolysis nitrogen/(mg∙kg^-1)	96.25	47.25
速效磷 Available P/(mg∙kg^-1)	47.3	14.7
速效钾 Available K/(mg∙kg^-1)	377.04	182.96
pH	8.35	8.85

土层 Soil layer/cm	处理 Treatment	根生物量 Root biomass/g	根长 Root length/cm	根表面积 Root surface area/cm²	根体积 Root volume/cm³	根尖数 Root tips/ind	分支数 Branch number/ind
20	CK	9.26±0.17d	13311.09±452.70d	1723.00±56.76c	34.35±1.61d	33300±698.98d	72026.00±1240.43d
	2Y	16.12±0.36c	34086.36±406.47c	5015.37±216.77b	104.29±4.34b	91994±7295.25c	137570.00±7023.88c
	4Y	54.62±1.15a	71155.00±6346.50a	10921.66±720.21a	220.56±10.19a	186950±11555.51	295751.00±20974.46a
	6Y	25.80±1.40b	47031.10±2961.83b	5242.66±159.77b	88.99±1.39c	156191±11086.59b	270110.00±1085.43b
40	CK	20.63±0.73a	34180.29±1321.00a	4956.95±65.06a	100.48±8.54a	90509.00±3526.64a	196746.00±11855.16a
	2Y	17.68±0.35b	26504.27±2149.72b	4674.64±138.43a	103.93±5.09a	45604.00±1514.55b	65727.00±1152.36b
	4Y	15.21±0.40c	21305.77±2348.58c	3953.16±279.67b	91.12±2.00b	40121.00±2717.40c	42793.00±709.59c
	6Y	15.89±0.79c	17119.45±2771.93d	3066.37±71.85c	69.15±2.34c	39031.00±1223.08c	63234.00±1141.66b

土层 Soil layer/cm	处理 Treatment	根生物量 Root biomass/g	根长 Root length/cm	根表面积 Root surface area/cm²	根体积 Root volume/cm³	根尖数 Root tips/ind	分支数 Branch number/ind
20	CK	9.26±0.17d	13311.09±452.70d	1723.00±56.76c	34.35±1.61d	33300±698.98d	72026.00±1240.43d
	2Y	16.12±0.36c	34086.36±406.47c	5015.37±216.77b	104.29±4.34b	91994±7295.25c	137570.00±7023.88c
	4Y	54.62±1.15a	71155.00±6346.50a	10921.66±720.21a	220.56±10.19a	186950±11555.51	295751.00±20974.46a
	6Y	25.80±1.40b	47031.10±2961.83b	5242.66±159.77b	88.99±1.39c	156191±11086.59b	270110.00±1085.43b
40	CK	20.63±0.73a	34180.29±1321.00a	4956.95±65.06a	100.48±8.54a	90509.00±3526.64a	196746.00±11855.16a
	2Y	17.68±0.35b	26504.27±2149.72b	4674.64±138.43a	103.93±5.09a	45604.00±1514.55b	65727.00±1152.36b
	4Y	15.21±0.40c	21305.77±2348.58c	3953.16±279.67b	91.12±2.00b	40121.00±2717.40c	42793.00±709.59c
	6Y	15.89±0.79c	17119.45±2771.93d	3066.37±71.85c	69.15±2.34c	39031.00±1223.08c	63234.00±1141.66b

指标 Indicators	CK	2Y	4Y	6Y
模型 Model	Y=1-0.9835^d	Y=1-0.9814^d	Y=1-0.9694^d	Y=1-0.9667^d
β	0.9835±0.0077a	0.9814±0.0042a	0.9694±0.0043b	0.9667±0.003b
D₃₀	21.44	19	11.48	10.53
D₅₀	41.66	36.92	22.3	20.47

Response of Fine Root Distribution and Hydraulic Characteristics of Apple to Long-term Plastic Mulching in Dryland of Northwest China

西北旱地苹果细根分布及水力特征对长期覆膜的响应

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 12

References 43

Related Articles 6

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

土层 Soil layer/cm	处理 Treatment	根系活力 Root activity/ (μg∙g^-1∙h^-1)	SOD/ (U∙g^-1)	POD/ (U∙g^-1)	CAT/ (mg∙g^-1)
20	CK	133.33±8.50a	26.49±0.79c	28.93±1.45d	9.04±0.16d
	2Y	120.30±8.02b	27.68±0.96c	33.75±1.44c	18.07±0.53c
	4Y	127.70±4.53ab	96±2.57a	49.40±0.75b	34.86±1.05b
	6Y	94.74±1.88c	78.34±1.40b	120.55±5.26a	38.82±0.25a
40	CK	122.15±9.08a	37.32±1.48b	36.16±1.13c	13.56±0.74d
	2Y	112.15±7.25a	30.58±0.41c	43.40±1.08c	21.63±1.22c
	4Y	108.81±7.14Ba	98.61±1.22a	53.04±1.60b	36.16±0.68b
	6Y	89.41±5.68b	91.84±2.44a	125.37±1.13a	40.67±1.45a

土层 Soil layer/cm	处理 Treatment	平均根径 Average root diameter/mm	周皮厚度 Periderm thickness/μm	韧皮部厚度 Phloem thickness/μm	木质部直径 Xylem diameter/μm	木质部面积占比 The proportion of xylem area/%
20	CK	0.54±0.04c	34.69±0.75c	365.82±10.35a	696.44±10.23b	49.47±1.43b
	2Y	0.67±0.04b	40.20±1.96b	305.64±5.94b	798.22±12.88a	54.34±1.20a
	4Y	0.60±0.11b	42.44±1.24b	314.6±7.04b	707.84±10.16b	51.47±1.54ab
	6Y	0.85±0.07a	53.54±1.66a	348.85±9.43a	588.43±10.01c	44.94±2.07c
40	CK	0.75±0.07c	30.10±1.83d	344.74±8.65c	796.97±6.41c	52.42±1.25ab
	2Y	1.11±0.10b	33.79±1.13c	313.47±7.49d	911.74±3.67a	52.86±0.88a
	4Y	0.85±0.07c	38.12±1.62b	398.00±7.33b	851.12±8.44b	51.44±0.70b
	6Y	1.53±0.12a	44.39±1.01a	422.29±9.04a	786.84±3.24c	50.41±0.70c

土层 Soil layer/cm	细根直径与木质部直径的关系函数 Relationship function between fine root diameter and xylem diameter	R²	细根直径与韧皮部厚度的关系函数 Relation function between fine root diameter and phloem thickness	R²
20	y= -5591.5x²+7487.2x-1732.9	0.892	y= -3210.2x²+4313.6x-1096.8	0.696
40	y= -800.55x²+1833.2x-134.25	0.995	y=338.84x²-739.48x+736.96	0.419

土层 Soil layer/ cm	处理 Treatment	平均导管内径Average catheter inner diameter/μm	导管数量Number of catheter	平均导管壁厚度 Average pipe wall thickness/ μm	导管横截面积 Cross-sectional area of catheter/ μm²	导管密度 Catheter density/ (ind·mm^-2)	根比导水率 Root specific water conductivity/ (kg∙m^-1∙s^-1∙MPa^-1)	栓塞脆弱性指数Embolization vulnerability index
20	CK	29.12±0.95b	110.00±4.36bc	1.99±0.02c	4341.00±45.73c	72.23±2.85c	81.06±7.01c	283137.68±5895.44c
	2Y	42.56±1.34a	108.00±5.57c	2.93±0.06b	35100.04±514.18a	53.98±1.43d	508.15±11.21a	815281.64±4560.46a
	4Y	29.93±0.94b	121.00±1.00b	3.20±0.04a	8921.95±149.69b	76.91±1.56b	146.61±8.75b	389153.72±1574.99b
	6Y	20.45±0.56c	168.00±7.94a	3.21±0.02a	3928.55±88.98c	154.52±5.32a	67.28±3.10c	188452.26±1835.38d
40	CK	32.51±1.56b	432.00±9.17a	2.21±0.03c	13975.72±71.06a	222.22±10.80a	115.37±5.501a	133968.06±1034.30d
	2Y	39.98±0.31a	128.00±4.36d	2.95±0.05b	11555.32±474.78c	49.04±1.75d	108.19±4.29ab	788404.50±9161.13a
	4Y	34.26±0.66b	176.00±4.36c	3.28±0.08a	13059.30±131.37b	67.38±1.35c	102.04±4.09b	442776.16±13528.70b
	6Y	29.77±0.78c	190.00±2.65b	3.35±0.05a	11499.70±851.43c	95.27±2.85b	42.83±3.37c	341251.95±3959.27c

指标 Indicators	处理 Treatment	平均导管内径 Average catheter inner diameter/μm	导管密度 Catheter density/ (ind·mm^-2)	导管横截面积 Cross-sectional area of catheter/μm²	木质部面积占比 The proportion of xylem area/%
根系活力 Root activity/ (μg∙g^-1∙h^-1)	CK	-0.901**	-0.562*	-0.613**	-0.749**
	2Y	-0.093	-0.157	0.537*	0.968**
	4Y	-0.783**	0.846**	-0.899**	0.651**
	6Y	-0.525*	0.693**	-0.7**	-0.633**
根比导水率 Root specific water conductivity/ (kg∙m^-1∙s^-1∙MPa^-1)	CK	0.837**	0.887**	0.955**	0.735**
	2Y	0.856**	0.922**	0.933**	0.653**
	4Y	-0.859**	0.948**	-0.976**	0.537*
	6Y	-0.975**	0.966**	-0.977**	-0.971**
栓塞脆弱性指数 Embolization vulnerability index	CK	-0.844**	-0.995**	-0.999**	-0.819**
	2Y	0.889**	0.952**	0.924**	0.698**
	4Y	0.916**	-0.927**	0.967**	-0.467
	6Y	0.993**	-0.992**	0.993**	0.938**

土层 Soil layer/ cm	处理 Treatment	土壤含水量 Soil moisture/ (g∙cm^-3)	土壤孔隙度 Soil porosity/ %	毛管孔隙度 Eapillary porosity/ %	土壤通气度Soil aeration/ %	容重 Soil bulk density/ (g∙cm^-3)	黏粒 Clay/ %	物理性黏粒Physical clay particles/%	压实密度 Packing density/ (g∙cm^-3)
20	CK	21.07±1.30bc	54.48±1.20ab	42.65±0.40b	35.34±1.60a	1.31±0.07a	9.7±0.03c	56.75±0.12b	2.18±0.08a
	2Y	23.68±1.40ab	57.56±1.40a	44.48±0.70a	34.20±1.40a	1.18±0.07b	9.61±0.04d	52.25±0.24d	2.05±0.08b
	4Y	24.23±1.90a	51.01±3.50bc	42.14±0.80b	26.78±1.80b	1.18±0.04b	9.77±0.03b	54.49±0.17c	2.06±0.04b
	6Y	19.13±1.30c	49.87±0.40c	41.46±0.90b	28.80±1.10b	1.24±0.05ab	9.93±0.03a	57.41±0.15a	2.13±0.03ab
40	CK	23.89±2.00b	47.71±1.30ab	36.09±1.50a	27.83±1.07a	1.27±0.06a	9.59±0.06b	57.89±0.37c	2.14±0.04ab
	2Y	28.20±1.50a	49.87±1.40a	34.24±1.10c	21.67±1.07b	1.24±0.02a	9.83±0.07b	60.42±0.17d	2.12±0.02b
	4Y	25.24±1.50ab	47.26±3.50ab	34.96±1.60ab	22.02±0.20b	1.26±0.05a	9.93±0.09ab	62.98±1.10b	2.16±0.03ab
	6Y	19.88±2.30c	44.80±2.00b	32.83±0.40c	20.91±1.80b	1.28±0.06a	10.20±0.35a	65.57±1.15a	2.20±0.02a

指标 Indicators	处理 Treatment	平均导管内径 Average catheter inner diameter/ μm	平均导管壁厚度 Average pipe wall thickness/ μm	导管密度 Catheter density/ (ind·mm^-2)	木质部面积占比 The proportion of xylem area/ %	根比导水率 Root specific water conductivity/ (kg∙m^-1∙s^-1∙MPa^-1)	栓塞脆弱性指数Embolization vulnerability index
土壤含水量 Soil moisture/ (g∙cm^-3)	CK	0.675**	0.731**	0.699**	0.626**	0.632**	-0.724**
	2Y	-0.613**	0.452	-0.759**	-0.758**	-0.886**	-0.759**
	4Y	0.422	-0.2	-0.196	-0.566*	-0.278	0.415
	6Y	0.256	0.084	-0.247	0.299	-0.152	0.215
容重 Soil bulk density/ (g∙cm^-3)	CK	-0.274	-0.312	-0.34	-0.178	-0.37	0.307
	2Y	-0.128	0.52*	-0.33	-0.861**	-0.573*	-0.451
	4Y	0.646**	0.807**	-0.778**	-0.814**	-0.778**	0.663**
	6Y	0.626**	0.757**	-0.644**	0.644**	-0.878**	0.621**
物理性黏粒 Physical clay particles/%	CK	0.933**	0.624**	0.9**	0.824**	-0.966**	-0.921**
	2Y	-0.834**	0.253	-0.877**	-0.673**	-0.998**	-0.908**
	4Y	0.94**	0.87**	0.958**	-0.653**	-0.957**	0.908**
	6Y	0.996**	0.925**	0.984**	0.922**	-0.959**	0.985**
压实密度 Packing density/ (g∙cm^-3)	CK	0.024	-0.323	-0.397	0.199	-0.42	0.328
	2Y	-0.521*	-0.357	-0.568*	-0.556*	-0.69**	-0.699**
	4Y	0.746**	0.682**	-0.791**	-0.691**	-0.737**	0.923**
	6Y	0.804**	0.77**	-0.876**	0.689**	-0.939**	0.829**

土层 Soil layer/cm	主成分Principal component	方差贡献率Variance contribution rate/%	累计贡献率 Cumulative contribution rate/%	载荷矩阵 Load matrix	综合得分 Composite scores		综合排名 Comprehensive ranking
20	1	71.065	71.065	木质部直径 Xylem diameter 韧皮部厚度 Phloem thickness 导管密度 Catheter density 导管直径 Vessel diameter	CK	0.509	2
	1	71.065	71.065		2Y	0.527	1
	2	24.816	95.88	导管壁厚度 Thickness of pipe wall	4Y	0.103	3
	2	24.816	95.88	导管壁厚度 Thickness of pipe wall	6Y	-1.14	4
40	1	49.363	49.363	周皮厚度 Periderm thickness 导管壁厚度 Thickness of pipe wall	CK	0.277	2
	2	29.979	79.342	木质部直径 Xylem diameter 导管直径 Vessel diameter	2Y	0.499	1
	2	29.979	79.342	木质部直径 Xylem diameter 导管直径 Vessel diameter	4Y	0.11	3
	3	20.658	100	韧皮部面积占比 Area ratio of phloem	6Y	-0.887	4

[1]	CHEN Minyi, ZHU Hanghai, SHE Weiduo, YIN Guangcai, HUANG Zuzhao, YANG Qiaoling. Health Risk Assessment and Source Apportionment of Soil Heavy Metals at A Legacy Shipyard Site in Pearl River Delta [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2023, 32(4): 794-804.
[2]	CHEN Jinfeng, YU Shiqin, FU Jiafang, XU Guoliang, YU Bo, LAI Xiaoqun, HU Siyuan, ZHANG Kaiqu, LIU Jiahua. Soil Quality Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Different Land Use in the Red Bed Landform Region of South China: Taking Nanxiong Basin as An Example [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2022, 31(5): 918-930.
[3]	CHEN Shuangshuang, ZHU Ninghua, ZHOU Guangyi, YUAN Xingming, SHANG Hai, WANG Yixuan. Vegetation and Soil Physical Characteristics of Artificial Arbor Forests under Different Grades of Rocky Desertification [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2022, 31(1): 52-61.
[4]	ZHAO Li, GUO Chunyan, ZHANG Wenjun, WANG Xiaojiang, LIU Pingsheng. Community Characteristics and Their Correlation Analysis of Typical Natural Forest in Zhalantun [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2021, 30(7): 1353-1359.
[5]	LIAO Yingchun, DUAN Honglang, SHI Xingxing, MENG Qingyin, LIU Wenfei, SHEN Fangfang, FAN Houbao, ZHU Tao. The Relationship between the Stand Growth and Root Biomass of Cunninghamia lanceolate Plantations [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2021, 30(6): 1121-1128.
[6]	ZHANG Peng, LIU Wei, WANG Tiegan, ZHONG Chenhui, TAO Yueliang. Impacts of Short-term Inorganic Arsenic Stress on Oxidative Damage, Antioxidant Enzymes and Antioxidant in Germlings of Sargassum horneri [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2021, 30(5): 1034-1041.