不同免疫诱导剂对杨梅凋萎病抗性的影响

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20240265

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

以东魁幼苗为试材,研究3种诱导剂(枯草芽孢杆菌、水杨酸、芸苔赤霉酸)对杨梅凋萎病抗性及生长发育的影响。结果表明,在枯草芽孢杆菌和芸苔赤霉酸处理下,杨梅凋萎病病情指数显著低于对照组,相对诱导效果分别为35.44%、27.16%;在枯草芽孢杆菌、芸苔赤霉酸诱导处理下,叶长、叶面积均高于对照,叶面积较对照分别提高8.82%、8.42%;3种诱导剂处理下,叶绿素含量均有不同程度增加,在枯草芽孢杆菌处理下叶绿素a、叶绿素b含量均显著高于对照;超氧化物歧化酶、过氧化物酶、过氧化氢酶等抗氧化酶活性在3种诱导剂处理下,均有显著提高,其中枯草芽孢杆菌、芸苔赤霉酸的作用较为显著,且其对应丙二醛含量显著低于对照。综上,研究筛选到能诱导杨梅凋萎病抗性的2种诱导剂,即枯草芽孢杆菌和芸苔赤霉酸,可为今后杨梅凋萎病的防控及相关研究提供重要依据。

关键词: 杨梅, 凋萎病, 诱导剂

Abstract:

In this study, using Dongkui seedlings as test materials, the effects of Bacillus subtilis(BS), salicylic acid(SA), and brassinolactone·indoleacetic acid·gibberellic acid(BHG) induced treatment on the resistance of twig blight disease and growth of Chinese bayberry were investigated. The results showed that when compared with the control group, the disease index was significantly lower under BS and BHG treatment, and their relative induction effects were 35.44% and 27.16%, respectively. Under the induction of BS and BHG, both leaf length and leaf area were higher than the control, with the leaf area increased by 8.82% and 8.42%, respectively. Under the treatment of all three inducers, the chlorophyll content increased to varying degrees. Under the treatment of BS, the content of chlorophyll a and chlorophyll b were significantly higher than the control. The activities of antioxidant enzymes including SOD, POD and CAT were significantly increased under the treatment of three inducers. Among them, the induction effects of BS and BHG were more significant, and their corresponding MDA content was significantly lower than the control. In summary, this study identified two inducers including BS and BHG that can induce resistance to twig blight disease, which can provide important basis for the prevention and control of twig blight disease in Chinese bayberry in the future.

Key words: Chinese bayberry, twig blight disease, inducers

中图分类号:

S667.6

丁娟, 孙学鹏, 俞浙萍, 张淑文, 孙鹂, 梁森苗, 戚行江. 不同免疫诱导剂对杨梅凋萎病抗性的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2024, 65(6): 1424-1428.

DING Juan, SUN Xuepeng, YU Zheping, ZHANG Shuwen, SUN Li, LIANG Senmiao, QI Xingjiang. Effects of different resistance inducers on the resistance of Chinese bayberry twig blight disease[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(6): 1424-1428.

图/表 4

参考文献 17

[1]	ZHANG S W, YU Z P, SUN L, et al. An overview of the nutritional value, health properties, and future challenges of Chinese bayberry[J]. PeerJ, 2022, 10: e13070.
[2]	ZHENG Y Y, YU Z P, LI Y G, et al. Alcohol extracts of Chinese bayberry branch induce S-phase arrest and apoptosis in HepG2 cells[J]. Food Science & Nutrition, 2023, 11(1): 493-503.
[3]	易春, 周长富, 林文力, 等. 杨梅病害性枯枝的症状及防治研究进展[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2015(5): 142-145.
[4]	陈梦微, 张成磊, 杨照渠, 等. 我国杨梅用农药登记情况及残留限量标准研究[J]. 中国南方果树, 2022, 51(4): 211-214.
[5]	邱德文. 我国植物免疫诱导技术的研究现状与趋势分析[J]. 植物保护, 2016, 42(5): 10-14.
[6]	甘金佳, 毛玲莉, 孙成荣, 等. 枯草芽孢杆菌在番茄病害防治上的应用与研究进展[J]. 长江蔬菜, 2021(8): 42-48.
[7]	乔岩, 董杰, 岳瑾, 等. 3种微生物菌剂对番茄灰霉病的防治效果[J]. 河南农业科学, 2014, 43(5): 111-113, 117.
[8]	江新华, 谢江辉, 王尉, 等. 水杨酸诱导香蕉抗枯萎病生理试验[J]. 中国果树, 2006(6): 39-42.
[9]	王险峰. 碧护使用技术进展[J]. 现代化农业, 2009(4): 4-5.
[10]	张守成, 吴国峰, 徐加健, 等. 不同杀菌剂处理对小麦茎基腐病的防控效果[J]. 中国农技推广, 2020, 36(2): 60-63.
[11]	俞浙萍, 严秀娟, 张淑文, 等. 油菜素内酯和寡糖素提高杨梅对凋萎病抗性的机理初探[J]. 园艺学报, 2023, 50(10): 2229-2241.
[12]	黄曦, 许兰兰, 黄荣韶, 等. 枯草芽孢杆菌在抑制植物病原菌中的研究进展[J]. 生物技术通报, 2010(1): 24-29.
[13]	林陈强, 李占飞, 张慧, 等. 枯草芽孢杆菌CS16诱导香蕉抗病性相关防御酶系的研究[J]. 福建农业学报, 2013, 28(6): 570-574.
[14]	陈艳光, 尹淑丽, 刘洪伟, 等. 枯草芽孢杆菌BSD-2诱导黄瓜抗灰霉病的作用研究[J]. 北方园艺, 2016(12): 119-123.
[15]	刘海颖, 司二静, 郭铭, 等. 外源水杨酸诱导大麦对条纹病的抗性研究[J]. 植物病理学报, 2022, 52(4): 658-668.
[16]	石亚莉, 周会玲, 唐永萍, 等. 水杨酸诱导苹果采后灰霉病抗性研究[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 46(2): 84-91, 103.
[17]	尚庆茂, 张志刚, 董涛, 等. 油菜素内酯诱导黄瓜幼苗抗灰霉病研究[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2007, 13(5): 630-634.

处理	病情指数/%	相对诱导效果/%
对照	52.42±3.86 a	0
枯草芽孢杆菌	31.82±2.55 d	35.44±2.48 a
水杨酸	47.62±6.43 b	9.66±2.39 c
芸苔赤霉酸	35.81±3.51 c	27.16±1.95 b

处理	病情指数/%	相对诱导效果/%
对照	52.42±3.86 a	0
枯草芽孢杆菌	31.82±2.55 d	35.44±2.48 a
水杨酸	47.62±6.43 b	9.66±2.39 c
芸苔赤霉酸	35.81±3.51 c	27.16±1.95 b

处理	叶长/cm		叶宽/cm		叶面积/cm²
处理	0 d	7 d	0 d	7 d	0 d	7 d
对照	10.52±1.29 a	10.64±1.85 b	2.63±0.34 a	2.65±0.38 a	26.31±3.56 a	27.43±2.74 b
枯草芽孢杆菌	10.47±1.84 a	11.23±1.69 a	2.61±0.29 a	2.69±0.35 a	26.62±3.24 a	29.85±3.21 a
水杨酸	10.39±2.05 a	10.57±2.36 b	2.59±0.18 a	2.66±0.21 a	26.47±2.69 a	27.29±3.09 b
芸苔赤霉酸	10.58±1.93 a	11.18±1.88 a	2.64±0.37 a	2.71±0.28 a	26.59±3.52 a	29.74±2.83 a

处理	叶长/cm		叶宽/cm		叶面积/cm²
处理	0 d	7 d	0 d	7 d	0 d	7 d
对照	10.52±1.29 a	10.64±1.85 b	2.63±0.34 a	2.65±0.38 a	26.31±3.56 a	27.43±2.74 b
枯草芽孢杆菌	10.47±1.84 a	11.23±1.69 a	2.61±0.29 a	2.69±0.35 a	26.62±3.24 a	29.85±3.21 a
水杨酸	10.39±2.05 a	10.57±2.36 b	2.59±0.18 a	2.66±0.21 a	26.47±2.69 a	27.29±3.09 b
芸苔赤霉酸	10.58±1.93 a	11.18±1.88 a	2.64±0.37 a	2.71±0.28 a	26.59±3.52 a	29.74±2.83 a

处理	叶绿素a含量/(mg·g^-1)		叶绿素b含量/(mg·g^-1)		类胡萝卜含量/(mg·g^-1)
处理	0 d	7 d	0 d	7 d	0 d	7 d
对照	0.64±0.09 a	0.69±0.08 b	0.22±0.04 a	0.24±0.05 b	0.11±0.02 a	0.09±0.02 c
枯草芽孢杆菌	0.61±0.07 a	0.82±0.05 a	0.19±0.02 a	0.28±0.03 a	0.09±0.01 a	0.14±0.01 b
水杨酸	0.65±0.11 a	0.68±0.07 b	0.21±0.05 a	0.23±0.06 b	0.10±0.02 a	0.12±0.02 b
芸苔赤霉酸	0.63±0.10 a	0.77±0.13 a	0.23±0.03 a	0.27±0.02 a	0.12±0.03 a	0.18±0.03 a