• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

土壤干燥和盐度对土壤-植物水力学的耦合影响。

Coupled effects of soil drying and salinity on soil-plant hydraulics.

机构信息

Chair of Soil Physics, Bayreuth Center of Ecology and Environmental Research (BayCEER), University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany.

Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Khartoum, Khartoum North, Sudan.

出版信息

Plant Physiol. 2022 Sep 28;190(2):1228-1241. doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiac229.

DOI:10.1093/plphys/kiac229
PMID:35579362
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9516742/
Abstract

Salinity and soil drying are expected to induce salt accumulation at the root-soil interface of transpiring plants. However, the consequences of this on the relationship between transpiration rate (E) and leaf xylem water potential (ψleaf-x) are yet to be quantified. Here, we used a noninvasive root pressure chamber to measure the E(ψleaf-x) relationship of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) treated with (saline) or without 100-mM NaCl (nonsaline conditions). The results were reproduced and interpreted with a soil-plant hydraulic model. Under nonsaline conditions, the E(ψleaf-x) relationship became progressively more nonlinear as the soil dried (θ ≤ 0.13 cm3 cm-3, ψsoil = -0.08 MPa or less). Under saline conditions, plants exhibited an earlier nonlinearity in the E(ψleaf-x) relationship (θ ≤ 0.15 cm3 cm-3, ψsoil =  -0.05 MPa or less). During soil drying, salinity induced a more negative ψleaf-x at predawn, reduced transpiration rate, and caused a reduction in root hydraulic conductance (from 1.48 × 10-6 to 1.30 × 10-6 cm3 s-1 hPa-1). The model suggested that the marked nonlinearity was caused by salt accumulation at the root surface and the consequential osmotic gradients. In dry soil, most water potential dissipation occurred in the bulk soil and rhizosphere rather than inside the plant. Under saline-dry conditions, the loss in osmotic potential at the root surface was the preeminent component of the total dissipation. The physical model of water flow and solute transport supports the hypothesis that a buildup of osmotic potential at the root-soil interface causes a large drop in ψleaf-x and limits transpiration rate under drought and salinity.

摘要

盐度和土壤干燥预计会在蒸腾植物的根-土界面诱导盐分积累。然而,这种情况对蒸腾速率 (E) 和叶片木质部水势 (ψleaf-x) 之间关系的影响尚未被量化。在这里,我们使用非侵入式根压室来测量番茄(Solanum lycopersicum L.)在处理(盐水)或不处理 100-mM NaCl(非盐水条件)时的 E(ψleaf-x) 关系。结果使用土壤-植物水力模型进行了重现和解释。在非盐水条件下,随着土壤变干(θ ≤ 0.13 cm3 cm-3,ψsoil = -0.08 MPa 或更低),E(ψleaf-x) 关系变得越来越非线性。在盐水条件下,植物在 E(ψleaf-x) 关系中表现出更早的非线性(θ ≤ 0.15 cm3 cm-3,ψsoil = -0.05 MPa 或更低)。在土壤干燥过程中,盐度导致黎明前的 ψleaf-x 更负,蒸腾速率降低,并导致根水力传导率降低(从 1.48 × 10-6 减少到 1.30 × 10-6 cm3 s-1 hPa-1)。该模型表明,明显的非线性是由根表面盐分积累和随之而来的渗透压梯度引起的。在干燥的土壤中,大部分水势耗散发生在土壤基质和根际中,而不是在植物内部。在盐干条件下,根表面的渗透势损失是总耗散的主要组成部分。水流和溶质运移的物理模型支持了这样一种假设,即在根-土界面处渗透压的积累会导致 ψleaf-x 的大幅下降,并限制干旱和盐度下的蒸腾速率。

相似文献

1
Coupled effects of soil drying and salinity on soil-plant hydraulics.土壤干燥和盐度对土壤-植物水力学的耦合影响。
Plant Physiol. 2022 Sep 28;190(2):1228-1241. doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiac229.
2
Stomatal closure of tomato under drought is driven by an increase in soil-root hydraulic resistance.在干旱条件下,番茄气孔关闭是由土壤-根系水力阻力的增加驱动的。
Plant Cell Environ. 2021 Feb;44(2):425-431. doi: 10.1111/pce.13939. Epub 2020 Nov 17.
3
Stomatal closure during water deficit is controlled by below-ground hydraulics.在水分亏缺时,气孔关闭由地下水力控制。
Ann Bot. 2022 Jan 28;129(2):161-170. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcab141.
4
Soil textures rather than root hairs dominate water uptake and soil-plant hydraulics under drought.在干旱条件下,土壤质地而非根毛主导着水分吸收和土壤-植物水力学。
Plant Physiol. 2021 Oct 5;187(2):858-872. doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiab271.
5
Transpiration Reduction in Maize ( L) in Response to Soil Drying.玉米(L)对土壤干燥的蒸腾作用降低
Front Plant Sci. 2020 Jan 23;10:1695. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2019.01695. eCollection 2019.
6
Unraveling the effects of plant hydraulics on stomatal closure during water stress in walnut.解析核桃水分胁迫期间植物水力对气孔关闭的影响
Plant Physiol. 2002 Jan;128(1):282-90.
7
Above and belowground traits impacting transpiration decline during soil drying in 48 maize (Zea mays) genotypes.在 48 个玉米(Zea mays)基因型中,影响土壤干燥过程中蒸腾作用下降的地上和地下特征。
Ann Bot. 2023 Mar 8;131(2):373-386. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcac147.
8
[Effects of sub-low temperature and drought stress on water transport and morphological anatomy of tomato plant].亚低温和干旱胁迫对番茄植株水分运输及形态解剖学的影响
Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao. 2020 Aug;31(8):2630-2636. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202008.028.
9
Abscisic acid root and leaf concentration in relation to biomass partitioning in salinized tomato plants.脱落酸在盐胁迫下番茄植株生物量分配与根系和叶片浓度的关系。
J Plant Physiol. 2012 Feb 15;169(3):226-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jplph.2011.09.009. Epub 2011 Nov 8.
10
Long-distance signals regulating stomatal conductance and leaf growth in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) plants subjected to partial root-zone drying.番茄(Lycopersicon esculentum)植株在部分根区干燥条件下调节气孔导度和叶片生长的长距离信号。
J Exp Bot. 2004 Nov;55(407):2353-63. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erh204. Epub 2004 Aug 13.

引用本文的文献

1
Inversion model of soil salinity in alfalfa covered farmland based on sensitive variable selection and machine learning algorithms.基于敏感变量选择和机器学习算法的苜蓿农田土壤盐渍化反演模型。
PeerJ. 2024 Sep 26;12:e18186. doi: 10.7717/peerj.18186. eCollection 2024.
2
Seeds Priming with Melatonin Improves Root Hydraulic Conductivity of Wheat Varieties under Drought, Salinity, and Combined Stress.褪黑素浸种提高小麦品种在干旱、盐胁迫及其复合胁迫下的根水导。
Int J Mol Sci. 2024 May 6;25(9):5055. doi: 10.3390/ijms25095055.
3
Interactive Effects of Microbial Fertilizer and Soil Salinity on the Hydraulic Properties of Salt-Affected Soil.微生物肥料与土壤盐分对盐渍土水力性质的交互作用
Plants (Basel). 2024 Feb 7;13(4):473. doi: 10.3390/plants13040473.
4
Effects of Single and Combined Drought and Salinity Stress on the Root Morphological Characteristics and Root Hydraulic Conductivity of Different Winter Wheat Varieties.单一及复合干旱和盐胁迫对不同冬小麦品种根系形态特征和根系水力传导率的影响
Plants (Basel). 2023 Jul 19;12(14):2694. doi: 10.3390/plants12142694.
5
Consequences of saline-dry conditions to the soil-plant-air continuum.盐碱干燥条件对土壤-植物-大气连续体的影响。
Plant Physiol. 2022 Sep 28;190(2):1080-1082. doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiac343.

本文引用的文献

1
Root hydraulic phenotypes impacting water uptake in drying soils.根系水力表型影响土壤干燥时的水分吸收。
Plant Cell Environ. 2022 Mar;45(3):650-663. doi: 10.1111/pce.14259. Epub 2022 Jan 27.
2
Stomatal closure during water deficit is controlled by below-ground hydraulics.在水分亏缺时,气孔关闭由地下水力控制。
Ann Bot. 2022 Jan 28;129(2):161-170. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcab141.
3
Herb and conifer roots show similar high sensitivity to water deficit.草本植物和针叶植物的根对水分亏缺表现出相似的高敏感性。
Plant Physiol. 2021 Aug 3;186(4):1908-1918. doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiab207.
4
Seawater exposure causes hydraulic damage in dying Sitka-spruce trees.海水暴露导致垂死的西黄松树发生水力损伤。
Plant Physiol. 2021 Oct 5;187(2):873-885. doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiab295.
5
Soil textures rather than root hairs dominate water uptake and soil-plant hydraulics under drought.在干旱条件下,土壤质地而非根毛主导着水分吸收和土壤-植物水力学。
Plant Physiol. 2021 Oct 5;187(2):858-872. doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiab271.
6
Changes in carbon and nitrogen metabolism during seawater-induced mortality of Picea sitchensis trees.西加云杉树海水诱导死亡过程中碳氮代谢的变化
Tree Physiol. 2021 Dec 4;41(12):2326-2340. doi: 10.1093/treephys/tpab073.
7
Soil hydraulics affect the degree of isohydricity.土壤水力学影响等水度的程度。
Plant Physiol. 2021 Jul 6;186(3):1378-1381. doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiab154.
8
Stomatal closure of tomato under drought is driven by an increase in soil-root hydraulic resistance.在干旱条件下,番茄气孔关闭是由土壤-根系水力阻力的增加驱动的。
Plant Cell Environ. 2021 Feb;44(2):425-431. doi: 10.1111/pce.13939. Epub 2020 Nov 17.
9
Root hydraulics in salt-stressed wheat.盐胁迫下小麦的根系水力特性
Funct Plant Biol. 2014 Apr;41(4):366-378. doi: 10.1071/FP13219.
10
Soil Rather Than Xylem Vulnerability Controls Stomatal Response to Drought.土壤而非木质部脆弱性控制着气孔对干旱的响应。
Trends Plant Sci. 2020 Sep;25(9):868-880. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2020.04.003. Epub 2020 May 3.