Effects of Drought and Rehydration on Yield and Dry Matter Accumulation and Distribution of Winter Wheat

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2022-0144

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to determine the effects of drought and rehydration on dry matter accumulation and distribution in various organs and grain yield of winter wheat, ‘Jimai 22’ was selected as the research object, and 100%(CK), 80%(T₁), 50%(T₂), 25%(T₃) and 0%(T₄) of the normal water supply (75 mm) were irrigated at jointing stage (April 2), and rewatered at the flowering stage (April 26) until the soil relative humidity reached 90 %. The dry matter mass and total dry matter mass of each organ of the plant in the two growth stages were measured, as well as the final yield of each treatment. The results showed that dry matter allocation ratio of winter wheat leaves decreased under drought stress at jointing stage, dry matter allocation ratio of stem and ear increased, dry matter allocation ratio of leaf sheath did not change much, and dry matter allocation ratio of all organs recovered to the same level as control after rehydration. The total dry matter weight of winter wheat treated with T₁, T₂, T₃ and T₄ decreased by 11.3%, 16.0%, 24.2% and 35.0% compared with CK, and the dry matter weight per spike decreased by 15.7%, 20.0%, 26.6% and 32.0%. The pre-flowering dry matter transport and transport rate of leaves were significantly decreased, while the pre-flowering dry matter transport rate of leaf sheath and stem was significantly increased. Compared with the control, the yield of winter wheat under T₁, T₂, T₃ and T₄ treatments decreased by 16.2%, 24.4%, 29.4% and 33.0%, the number of grains per spike decreased by 9.9%, 11.6%, 20.0% and 23.3%, and the sterile spike rate increased by 6.2, 7.5, 9.6 and 8.1 percentage points, respectively. It had little effect on 1000-grain weight and spikelet number. In conclusion, drought at jointing stage leads to dry matter distribution to storage organs such as stems and panicle, and the total dry matter weight and panicle dry matter weight decreased significantly after rehydration, and the greater the degree of drought stress, the greater the range of change. Drought stress at jointing stage resulted in the decrease of panicle number, the increase of sterile panicle rate and the decrease of yield.

Key words: drought stress, rehydration, dry matter transport, water utilization, dry matter distribution, jointing stage

YIN Xundong, LV Guangde, CHEN Yongjun, QIAN Zhaoguo, LIU Jia, ZOU Junli, ZHANG Jibo, JIANG Mengyuan. Effects of Drought and Rehydration on Yield and Dry Matter Accumulation and Distribution of Winter Wheat[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2024, 14(5): 1-8.

Figures/Tables 5

References 29

[1]	姚素梅, 康跃虎, 刘海军. 喷灌与地面灌溉冬小麦干物质积累、分配和运转的比较研究[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2008, 26(6):51-56.
[2]	骆兰平, 于振文, 王东, 等. 土壤水分和种植密度对小麦旗叶光合性能和干物质积累与分配的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2011, 37(6):1049-1059.
[3]	任巍, 姚克敏, 于强, 等. 水分调控对冬小麦同化物分配与水分利用效率的影响研究[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2003, 11(4):92-94.
[4]	赵辉, 戴廷波, 姜东, 等. 高温下干旱和渍水对冬小麦花后旗叶光合特性和物质转运的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2007, 18(2):333-338.
[5]	李彦彬, 朱亚南, 李道西, 等. 阶段干旱及复水对小麦生长发育、光合和产量的影响[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2018, 37(8):76-82.
[6]	刘明, 武建军, 吕爱锋, 等. 黄淮海平原典型区冬小麦水分胁迫规律与灌溉策略[J]. 农业工程学报, 2010, 26(5):40-44.
[7]	冯伟, 罗毅, 郭天财, 等. 灌水对不同穗型小麦碳氮代谢及籽粒灌浆的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2008, 28(6):1036-1041.
[8]	刘培, 蔡焕杰, 王健. 土壤水分胁迫对冬小麦生长发育、物质分配及产量构成的影响[J]. 农业现代化研究, 2020, 31(3):330-333.
[9]	陈晓远, 高志红, 罗远培, 等. 水分胁迫效应对冬小麦生长发育的影响研究[J]. 华北农学报, 2004, 19(3):43-46. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-7091.2004.03.011
[10]	谷艳芳, 丁圣彦, 高志英, 等. 干旱胁迫下冬小麦光合产物分配格局及其与产量的关系[J]. 生态学报, 2010, 30(5):1167-1173.
[11]	胡程达, 杨光仙, 成林. 干旱对冬小麦光合产物积累和分配的影响[J]. 中国农业气象, 2014(3):243-249.
[12]	姜东, 于振文, 李永庚, 等. 冬小麦叶茎粒可溶性糖含量变化及其与籽粒淀粉积累的关系[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2016, 21(3):38-41.
[13]	谭方颖, 李昊, 王建林, 等. 华北夏玉米干物质分配系数对干旱胁迫的响应[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(1):220-226.
[14]	王会肖, 蔡燕. 农田水分利用效率研究进展及调控途径[J]. 中国农业气象, 2008, 29(3):272-276.
[15]	山仑, 徐萌. 节水农业及其生理生态基础[J]. 应用生态学报, 1991, 2(1):70-76.
[16]	孟兆江, 卞新民, 刘安能, 等. 调亏灌溉对棉花生长发育及其产量和品质的影响[J]. 棉花学报, 2008, 20(1):39-44. doi: 10.11963/cs010808
[17]	谷艳芳. 不同水分处理下冬小麦光合产物分配格局、过程及调控机制的研究[D]. 开封: 河南大学, 2008.
[18]	边泽鹏. 冬小麦对花前干旱复水的响应规律研究[D]. 郑州: 华北水利水电大学, 2020.
[19]	王月福, 李素美, 王玉叶, 等. 水分对冬小麦开花后光合产物积累运转的影响[J]. 莱阳农学院学报, 1998, 15(2):94-98.
[20]	SU Z Y, ZHANG J S, WU W L, et al. Effects of conservation tillage practices on winter wheat water-use efficiency and crop yield on the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Agricultural water management, 2007, 87(3):307-314.
[21]	李连朝, 王学臣. 水分亏缺对植物细胞壁的影响及其与细胞延伸生长的关系[J]. 植物生理学报, 1996(5):321-327.
[22]	姚宁, 周元刚, 宋利兵, 等. 不同水分胁迫条件下DSSAT-CERES-Wheat模型的调参与验证[J]. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(12):138-150.
[23]	丁彤彤, 李朴芳, 曹丽, 等. 干旱胁迫下不同基因型小麦干物质转运对产量形成的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2021, 39(6):62-72.
[24]	傅晓艺, 王红光, 刘志连, 等. 不同水分处理对小麦氮素和干物质积累与分配的影响麦类作物学报[J]. 2020, 40(8):955-963.
[25]	李翠平, 秦保平, 李亚静, 等. 减少灌水量对强筋小麦花后干物质和氮素积累、转运及产量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2020, 40(8):964-971.
[26]	李萍. 返青期和拔节期土壤水分对冬小麦茎蘖成穗和产量的调控及其生理特性[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2020.
[27]	崔亚坤. 分蘖和拔节期土壤干旱对小麦产量形成的影响及其生理机理[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2015.
[28]	宋妮, 黄修桥, 孙景生, 等. 水分胁迫对盆栽冬小麦产量和部分品质性状的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2009, 29(3):476-479.
[29]	姚宁, 宋利兵, 刘健, 等. 不同生长阶段水分胁迫对旱区冬小麦生长发育和产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2015, 48(12):2379-2389. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.12.011

处理	转运量/g			转运率/%
处理	叶	叶鞘	茎	叶	叶鞘	茎
CK	1.33 a	0.94 ab	2.73 a	35.6 a	24.5 a	33.5 a
T₁	0.93 b	0.81 a	2.86 a	30.9 b	22.8 a	38.4 ab
T₂	0.82 bc	0.98 ab	3.01 a	28.4 b	31.3 ab	44.6 bc
T₃	0.81 bc	1.16 b	2.79 a	27.0 bc	39.0 b	45.3 bc
T₄	0.70 c	1.13 ab	2.93 a	23.5 c	35.5 b	48.6 c

处理	转运量/g			转运率/%
处理	叶	叶鞘	茎	叶	叶鞘	茎
CK	1.33 a	0.94 ab	2.73 a	35.6 a	24.5 a	33.5 a
T₁	0.93 b	0.81 a	2.86 a	30.9 b	22.8 a	38.4 ab
T₂	0.82 bc	0.98 ab	3.01 a	28.4 b	31.3 ab	44.6 bc
T₃	0.81 bc	1.16 b	2.79 a	27.0 bc	39.0 b	45.3 bc
T₄	0.70 c	1.13 ab	2.93 a	23.5 c	35.5 b	48.6 c

处理	产量/(kg/hm²)	穗粒数	千粒重/g	小穗数	不孕穗率/%
CK	8641.6 a	42.4 a	42.9 a	20.4 a	7.8 a
T₁	7242.8 b	38.2 ab	41.7 a	20.7 a	14.0 b
T₂	6530.5 b	37.5 abc	41.1 a	20.1 a	15.3 bc
T₃	6097.3 b	33.9 bc	41.5 a	20.2 a	17.4 c
T₄	5786.6 b	32.5 c	43.7 a	19.4 a	15.9 bc

处理	产量/(kg/hm²)	穗粒数	千粒重/g	小穗数	不孕穗率/%
CK	8641.6 a	42.4 a	42.9 a	20.4 a	7.8 a
T₁	7242.8 b	38.2 ab	41.7 a	20.7 a	14.0 b
T₂	6530.5 b	37.5 abc	41.1 a	20.1 a	15.3 bc
T₃	6097.3 b	33.9 bc	41.5 a	20.2 a	17.4 c
T₄	5786.6 b	32.5 c	43.7 a	19.4 a	15.9 bc