酸胁迫对海南绿橙生理代谢及抗氧化调控基因表达的影响

doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20195886

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了分析酸性土壤对海南绿橙生长代谢和光合作用的影响,并探究其在酸胁迫下的抗氧化调控机制,通过盆栽试验,研究海南绿橙在酸胁迫下的生理代谢变化、抗氧化反应以及关键抗氧化酶调控基因的表达特征。结果表明,强酸性土壤环境下,植株的株高增长量、叶面积与绿橙植株的鲜质量显著下降,其中以pH值 3.5处理的影响最为严重;弱酸性(pH值 6.5)的土壤能够促进植株的生长,表现为各生长指标量的正增长。强酸处理严重影响了绿橙叶片的光合作用和正常的生长代谢,表现为蒸腾速率(Tr)和气孔导度(Gs)值的下降。pH值3.5酸胁迫24 h后,超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)和苯丙氨酸解氨酶(PAL)活性分别提升6.60,5.90倍;pH值 3.5处理下,叶片丙二醛(MDA)含量较0 h增加6.47倍,显著高于pH值 6.5处理。主成分分析(PCA)和冗余分析(RDA)表明,酶活性变化与生理生化指标呈显著负相关(R²=0.82);基因表达分析显示,pH值3.5酸胁迫后24,48 h,CsSOD与CsPAL表达量分别达峰值,较0 h分别增加2.33,2.64倍,72 h内持续上调。强酸性土壤通过降低光合色素含量及代谢效率抑制绿橙生长发育;SOD与PAL为响应酸胁迫的关键抗氧化酶,CsSOD和CsPAL基因通过动态调控酶活性抵御酸胁迫。

关键词: 绿橙, 酸胁迫, 生理代谢, 光合代谢, 抗氧化酶, 调控基因

Abstract:

This study aimed to investigate the effects of acidic soil on the growth metabolism and photosynthesis of Hainan green sweet orange (Citrus sinensis L.)and to elucidate its antioxidant regulatory mechanisms under acid stress.A pot experiment was conducted to analyze the physiological metabolic changes,antioxidant responses,and expression patterns of key antioxidant enzyme regulatory genes in green sweet orange under acid stress.The results showed that the plant height growth,leaf area and fresh weight of green sweet orange plants decreased significantly under a strongly acidic soil environment,with the most serious effect of pH 3.5 treatment;the weakly acidic(pH 6.5)soil could promote the growth of plants,which manifested as positive growth in the amount of each growth index.Strong acid treatment significantly impaired photosynthesis and normal growth metabolism of green sweet orange leaves,manifested as negative growth in transpiration rate(Tr)and stomatal conductance(Gs)were significantly reduced.Superoxide dismutase(SOD)and phenylalanine ammonia-lyase(PAL)activities increased by 6.60-fold and 5.90-fold at 24 h post-treatment under pH 3.5.The malondialdehyde(MDA)content in leaves treated with pH 3.5 increased by 6.47-fold compared to the initial time point(0 h),significantly higher than that under pH 6.5.Principal component analysis(PCA)and redundancy analysis(RDA)revealed a significant negative correlation between enzyme activity and physiological-biochemical indices(R²=0.82).Gene expression analysis demonstrated that CsSOD and CsPAL reached peak levels at 24,48 h post-stress respectively and remained upregulated within 72 h,showing 2.33-fold and 2.64-fold increases compared to 0 h,respectively.In summary,strongly acidic soil inhibits the growth and development of green sweet orange by reducing photosynthetic pigment content and metabolic efficiency.SOD and PAL serve as key antioxidant enzymes in response to acid stress,with CsSOD and CsPAL genes dynamically regulating enzymatic activity to mitigate stress.

Key words: Green sweet orange, Acid stress, Physiological metabolism, Photosynthetic metabolism, Antioxidant enzyme, Regulatory gene

中图分类号:

赵亚, 范鸿雁, 李少卡, 颜彩缤, 白丽, 黄海杰, 肖敏. 酸胁迫对海南绿橙生理代谢及抗氧化调控基因表达的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2026, 41(1): 86-96. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20195886.

ZHAO Ya, FAN Hongyan, LI Shaoka, YAN Caibin, BAI Li, HUANG Haijie, XIAO Min. Impact of Acid Stress on Physiological Metabolism and Antioxidant Regulatory Gene Expression in Hainan Green Sweet Orange[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2026, 41(1): 86-96. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20195886.

http://www.hbnxb.net/CN/Y2026/V41/I1/86

图/表 8

参考文献 53

[2]	Lu Y, Wang C X, Wang L L, Yu T Y, Zheng Y M, Wu Z F, Li L, Wang C B. Physiological responses of different peanut varieties to acid stress at seedling stage[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2020, 35(1):73-80. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20190535
[3]	滕跃, 高玉亮, 张雁, 金美玉, 李葵花. 酸胁迫对马铃薯脱毒试管苗结薯特性及其几种糖代谢的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2017(1):140-143.doi:10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2017.01.025.
	Teng Y, Gao Y L, Zhang Y, Jin M Y, Li K H. Effects of acid stress on microtuberization and some glycometabolism of potato in vitro plantlets[J]. Crops, 2017(1):140-143.
[4]	Zhang Y Y, Yu T, Ma W B, Dayananda B, Iwasaki K, Li J Q. Morphological,pphysiological and photophysiological responses of critically endangered Acer catalpifolium to acid stress[J]. Plants, 2021, 10(9):1958.doi:10.3390/plants10091958. URL
[5]	Wiktorczyk-Kapischke N, Wałecka-Zacharska E, Korkus J, Grudlewska-Buda K, Budzyńska A, Wnuk K, Gospodarek-Komkowska E, Skowron K. The influence of stress factors on selected phenotypic and genotypic features of Listeria monocytogenes-a pilot study[J]. BMC Microbiology, 2023, 23(1):259.doi:10.1186/s12866-023-03006-5. pmid: 37716959
[6]	王华, 张石虎, 龚雪梅, 王瑞生, 邓新义. 不同水分条件下杜鹃花转录因子的转录组分析[J]. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2018, 26(5):515-522.doi:10.11926/jtsb.3910.
	Wang H, Zhang S H, Gong X M, Wang R S, Deng X Y. Transcriptome analysis of transcription factors of rhododendron pulchurum Baifeng 4 under different water conditions[J]. Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Botany, 2018, 26(5):515-522.
[7]	Wu J, Wang L F, Li L, Wang S M. De novo assembly of the common bean transcriptome using short reads for the discovery of drought-responsive genes[J]. PLoS One, 2014, 9(10):e109262.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0109262. URL
[8]	Zaïdi I, Ebel C, Touzri M, Herzog E, Evrard J L, Schmit A C, Masmoudi K, Hanin M. TMKP1 is a novel wheat stress responsive MAP kinase phosphatase localized in the nucleus[J]. Plant Molecular Biology, 2010, 73(3):325-338.doi:10.1007/s11103-010-9617-4. pmid: 20204675
[9]	Tezara W, Mitchell V, Driscoll S P, Lawlor D W. Effects of water deficit and its interaction with CO₂ supply on the biochemistry and physiology of photosynthesis in sunflower[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2002, 53(375):1781-1791.doi:10.1093/jxb/erf021. pmid: 12147728
[10]	王志恒, 赵延蓉, 黄思麒, 王悦娟, 起金娥, 魏玉清. 外源海藻糖影响甜高粱幼苗抗旱性的生理生化机制[J]. 植物生理学报, 2022, 58(4):654-666.doi:10.13592/j.cnki.ppj.100026.
	Wang Z H, Zhao Y R, Huang S Q, Wang Y J, Qi J E, Wei Y Q. Physiological and biochemical mechanism of exogenous trehalose on drought resistance in sweet sorghum seedlings[J]. Plant Physiology Journal, 2022, 58(4):654-666.
[11]	Huseynova I M. Photosynthetic characteristics and enzymatic antioxidant capacity of leaves from wheat cultivars exposed to drought[J]. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta(BBA)-Bioenergetics, 2012, 1817(8):1516-1523.doi:10.1016/j.bbabio.2012.02.037. pmid: 22417798
[12]	汪本福, 黄金鹏, 杨晓龙, 程建平, 赵锋, 陈少愚. 干旱胁迫抑制作物光合作用机理研究进展[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2014, 53(23):5628-5632.doi:10.14088/j.cnki.issn0439-8114.2014.23.003.
	Wang B F, Huang J P, Yang X L, Cheng J P, Zhao F, Chen S Y. Advances on inhibition mechanism of crop photosynthesis by drought stress[J]. Hubei Agricultural Sciences, 2014, 53(23):5628-5632.
[13]	Chaves M M, Flexas J, Pinheiro C. Photosynthesis under drought and salt stress:regulation mechanisms from whole plant to cell[J]. Annals of Botany, 2009, 103(4):551-560.doi:10.1093/aob/mcn125. pmid: 18662937
[14]	Nishiyama Y, Allakhverdiev S I, Murata N. Protein synthesis is the primary target of reactive oxygen species in the photoinhibition of photosystem Ⅱ[J]. Physiologia Plantarum, 2011, 142(1):35-46.doi:10.1111/j.1399-3054.2011.01457.x. URL
[15]	Lawlor D W, Tezara W. Causes of decreased photosynthetic rate and metabolic capacity in water-deficient leaf cells:a critical evaluation of mechanisms and integration of processes[J]. Annals of Botany, 2009, 103(4):561-579.doi:10.1093/aob/mcn244. pmid: 19155221
[16]	张梁葛, 石文昕, 李爱, 张卫华, 林萍, 薛佳. 不同耐热型西瓜幼苗对高温胁迫的生理响应[J]. 华北农学报, 2024, 39(5):117-127.doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20194963.
	Zhang L G, Shi W X, Li A, Zhang W H, Lin P, Xue J. Physiological response of different heat-tolerant watermelon seedlings to high temperature stress[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2024, 39(5):117-127. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20194963
[17]	薛晓清. 不同胁迫处理荔枝果皮褐变差异及机理研究[D]. 广州: 华南农业大学, 2016.doi:10.7666/d.D01036721.
	Xue X Q. Differences among litchi pericarp browning caused by different stress treatments and its mechanisms[D]. Guangzhou: South China Agricultural University, 2016.
[18]	Dey S, Biswas A, Deng Y, Birhanie Z M, Chen W T, Li D F. Exogenous melatonin enhances low-temperature stress of jute seedlings through modulation of photosynthesis and antioxidant potential[J]. Heliyon, 2023, 9(8):e19125.doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19125. URL
[19]	Logan B A, Kornyeyev D, Hardison J, Holaday A S. The role of antioxidant enzymes in photoprotection[J]. Photosynthesis Research, 2006, 88(2):119-132.doi:10.1007/s11120-006-9043-2. pmid: 16622785
[20]	刘静文. 低pH对柑橘生长和根系蛋白表达谱的影响[D]. 福州: 福建农林大学, 2017.
	Liu J W. Effect of low pH on growth and root proteome of citrus grandis[D]. Fuzhou: Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, 2017.
[21]	赵亚. 溃疡病菌入侵柑橘叶片的解剖观察及抗性相关基因FLS2的克隆与分析[D]. 长沙: 湖南农业大学, 2017.
	Zhao Y. Dissection observation of the invasion of Xanthomonas citri subsp.citri into citrus leaf and the cloning and analysis to citrus gene FLS2[D]. Changsha: Hunan Agricultural University, 2017.
[22]	Guo J H, Liu X J, Zhang Y, Shen J L, Han W X, Zhang W F, Christie P, Goulding K W T, Vitousek P M, Zhang F S. Significant acidification in major Chinese croplands[J]. Science, 2010, 327(5968):1008-1010.doi:10.1126/science.1182570. pmid: 20150447
[23]	章爱群, 郭海如, 斯琴朝克图, 崔雪梅, 李春生. 酸胁迫下玉米基因型生物学性状的主成分分析[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2018, 46(14):79-82.doi:10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2018.14.019.
	Zhang A Q, Guo H R, Si Q C K T, Cui X M, Li C S. Principal component analysis of biological traits of maize genotypes under acid stress[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 46(14):79-82.
[24]	Kobayashi Y, Kobayashi Y, Watanabe T, Shaff J E, Ohta H, Kochian L V, Wagatsuma T, Kinraide T B, Koyama H. Molecular and physiological analysis of Al³⁺ and H⁺ rhizotoxicities at moderately acidic conditions[J]. Plant Physiology, 2013, 163(1):180-192.doi:10.1104/pp.113.222893. pmid: 23839867
[25]	Kochian L V. Cellular mechanisms of aluminum toxicity and resistance in plants[J]. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology, 1995, 46:237-260.doi:10.1146/annurev.pp.46.060195.001321. URL
[26]	Lee Y, Park J, Im K, Kim K, Lee J, Lee K, Park J A, Lee T K, Park D S, Yang J S, Kim D, Lee S. Arabidopsis leaf necrosis caused by simulated acid rain is related to the salicylic acid signaling pathway[J]. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2006, 44(1):38-42.doi:10.1016/j.plaphy.2006.01.003. URL
[27]	Neves N R, Oliva M A, da Cruz Centeno D, Costa A C, Ribas R F, Pereira E G. Photosynthesis and oxidative stress in the restinga plant species Eugenia uniflora L.exposed to simulated acid rain and iron ore dust deposition:potential use in environmental risk assessment[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2009, 407(12):3740-3745.doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.02.035. URL
[28]	Liu J X, Zhou G Y, Yang C W, Ou Z Y, Peng C L. Responses of chlorophyll fluorescence and xanthophyll cycle in leaves of Schima superba Gardn.& Champ.and Pinus massoniana Lamb.to simulated acid rain at Dinghushan Biosphere Reserve,China[J]. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 2007, 29(1):33-38.doi:10.1007/s11738-006-0005-2.
[29]	Chen J, Wang W H, Liu T W, Wu F H, Zheng H L. Photosynthetic and antioxidant responses of Liquidambar formosana and Schima superba seedlings to sulfuric-rich and nitric-rich simulated acid rain[J]. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2013, 64:41-51.doi:10.1016/j.plaphy.2012.12.012. URL
[30]	Earl H J. Stomatal and non-stomatal restrictions to carbon assimilation in soybean(Glycine max)lines differing in water use efficiency[J]. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 2002, 48(3):237-246.doi:10.1016/S0098-8472(02)00041-2. URL
[31]	Flexas J, Medrano H. Drought-inhibition of photosynthesis in C3 plants:stomatal and non-stomatal limitations revisited[J]. Annals of Botany, 2002, 89(2):183-189.doi:10.1093/aob/mcf027. pmid: 12099349
[32]	杨志晓, 王轶, 谢升东, 郑少清, 张童, 刘恒仙, 张红樱, 夏海乾, 曹毅, 芶剑渝, 张吉顺, 林英超. 二个抗、感病烟草品种对赤星病胁迫的光合生理响应差异[J]. 植物生理学报, 2022, 58(3):565-576.doi:10.13592/j.cnki.ppj.2021.0332.
	Yang Z X, Wang Y, Xie S D, Zheng S Q, Zhang T, Liu H X, Zhang H Y, Xia H Q, Cao Y, Gou J Y, Zhang J S, Lin Y C. Differences of photosynthetic physiological response in two resistant and susceptible tobacco cultivars to brown spot stress[J]. Plant Physiology Journal, 2022, 58(3):565-576. doi: 10.1111/ppl.1983.58.issue-4 URL
[33]	张政, 王晓荣, 钱虹, 张兰, 颜鹏, 张丽平, 张新富, 李鑫, 韩文炎. 炭疽病对茶树叶片光合特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(11):2020-2026.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2020.11.12.
	Zhang Z, Wang X R, Qian H, Zhang L, Yan P, Zhang L P, Zhang X F, Li X, Han W Y. Effects of anthracnose disease on photosynthetic characteristics in tea leaves(Camellia sinensis L.)[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2020, 32(11):2020-2026.
[34]	Mittler R. Oxidative stress,antioxidants and stress tolerance[J]. Trends in Plant Science, 2002, 7(9):405-410.doi:10.1016/S1360-1385(02)02312-9. pmid: 12234732
[35]	Tounsi S, Jemli S, Feki K, Brini F, Najib Saïdi M. Superoxide dismutase(SOD)family in durum wheat:promising candidates for improving crop resilience[J]. Protoplasma, 2023, 260(1):145-158.doi:10.1007/s00709-022-01767-w.
[36]	de Souza-Vieira Y, Felix-Mendes E, Galhego V, Bastos G A, Felix-Cordeiro T, Ding X, Zhang Y, Corrêa R L, Wang X Y, Sachetto-Martins G, Jardim-Messeder D. Euphorbiaceae superoxide dismutase,catalase,and glutathione peroxidase as clues to better comprehend high drought tolerance in Castor bean[J]. Industrial Crops and Products, 2024, 222:119510.doi:10.1016/j.indcrop.2024.119510. URL
[37]	丁玉梅, 马龙海, 周晓罡, 姚春馨, 董禄风, 孙茂林. 干旱胁迫下马铃薯叶片脯氨酸、丙二醛含量变化及与耐旱性的相关性分析[J]. 西南农业学报, 2013, 26(1):106-110.doi:10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2013.01.043.
	Ding Y M, Ma L H, Zhou X G, Yao C X, Dong L F, Sun M L. Effects of drought stress on free proline and malonaldedyde contents in potato leaves and correlation analysis of drought-tolerant level among different varieties[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2013, 26(1):106-110.
[38]	赵风斌, 王丽卿, 季高华, 李为星. 盐胁迫对3种沉水植物生物学指标及叶片中丙二醛含量的影响[J]. 环境污染与防治, 2012, 34(10):40-44.doi:10.15985/j.cnki.1001-3865.2012.10.001.
	Zhao F B, Wang L Q, Ji G H, Li W X. Effects of NaCl stress on plant biology indicators and MDA content of 3 submerged plants[J]. Environmental Pollution & Control, 2012, 34(10):40-44.
[39]	王孝威, 段艳红, 曹慧, 郑王义. 水分胁迫对短枝型果树光合作用的非气孔限制[J]. 西北植物学报, 2003, 23(9):1609-1613.doi:10.3321/j.issn:1000-4025.2003.09.025.
	Wang X W, Duan Y H, Cao H, Zheng W Y. The photosynthetic nonstomatal limitatoin of spur-apple yong trees under water stress[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2003, 23(9):1609-1613.
[40]	陶明福. 槟榔黄化病植株生理生化指标比较分析[D]. 海口: 海南大学, 2010.
	Tao M F. Comparative analysis of physiological and biochemical index related to arecanut leaf infected by yellow leaf diseases[D]. Haikou: Hainan University, 2010.
[41]	Schekaleva O, Luneva O, Klimenko E, Shaliukhina S, Breygina M. Dynamics of ROS production,SOD,POD and CAT activity during stigma maturation and pollination in Nicotiana tabacum and Lilium longiflorum[J]. Plant Biology, 2024, 26(7):1240-1246.doi:10.1111/plb.13677. URL
[42]	陈顺钰, 韩航, 薛凌云, 张韵, 侯晓龙, 蔡丽平, 周垂帆. Pb、Cd和酸胁迫对枫香种子萌发、幼苗生长及体内抗氧化酶活性的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2018, 37(4):647-655.doi:10.11654/jaes.2017-1510.
	Chen S Y, Han H, Xue L Y, Zhang Y, Hou X L, Cai L P, Zhou C F. Effects of Pb,Cd,and acid stress on seed germination,seedling growth,and antioxidant enzyme activities of Liquidambar formosana[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2018, 37(4):647-655.
[43]	黄小贞, 赵德刚. 植物苯丙氨酸解氨酶表达调控机理的研究进展[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2017, 45(4):16-20.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-3601.2017.04.005.
	Huang X Z, Zhao D G. Research progress in regulation and control mechanism of phenylalanine ammonia lyase in plants[J]. Guizhou Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 45(4):16-20.
[44]	薛莲. 采后苹果与炭疽菌互作的生理生化机制的研究[D]. 合肥: 安徽农业大学, 2005.doi:10.7666/d.y737707.
	Xue L. Studies on physiological and biochemical mechanism of host-pathogen reaction between postharvest apple and Colletotrichum gloeosporioides[D]. Hefei: Anhui Agricultural University, 2005.
[45]	Debnath B, Sikdar A, Islam S, Hasan K, Li M, Qiu D L. Physiological and molecular responses to acid rain stress in plants and the impact of melatonin,glutathione and silicon in the amendment of plant acid rain stress[J]. Molecules, 2021, 26(4):862.doi:10.3390/molecules26040862. URL
[46]	Monshausen G B, Bibikova T N, Weisenseel M H, Gilroy S. Ca²⁺ regulates reactive oxygen species production and pH during mechanosensing in Arabidopsis roots[J]. The Plant Cell, 2009, 21(8):2341-2356.doi:10.1105/tpc.109.068395. URL
[47]	Liu T W, Niu L, Fu B, Chen J, Wu F H, Chen J, Wang W H, Hu W J, He J X, Zheng H L. A transcriptomic study reveals differentially expressed genes and pathways respond to simulated acid rain in Arabidopsis thaliana[J]. Genome, 2013, 56(1):49-60.doi:10.1139/gen-2012-0090. URL
[48]	邓胜兴, 曾明, 熊伟, 罗光杰, 张广越, 刘平. 干旱胁迫对柑橘叶片保护酶系统的影响[J]. 西南大学学报(自然科学版), 2009, 31(2):61-64.doi:10.13718/j.cnki.xdzk.2009.02.024.
	Deng S X, Zeng M, Xiong W, Luo G J, Zhang G Y, Liu P. Effects of drought stress on the antioxidative enzyme system in Citrus leaves[J]. Journal of Southwest University(Natural Science Edition), 2009, 31(2):61-64.
[49]	魏清江, 冯芳芳, 辜青青. 柑橘盐胁迫响应及耐盐机制研究进展[J]. 果树学报, 2015, 32(1):136-141.doi:10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20140296.
	Wei Q J, Feng F F, Gu Q Q. Advances on salinity responses and tolerance in Citrus[J]. Journal of Fruit Science, 2015, 32(1):136-141.
[50]	Hao Y F, Hu Y, Jaqueth J, Lin J G, He C, Lin G F, Zhao M X, Ren J, Tamang T M, Park S, Robertson A E, White F F, Fu J J, Li B L, Liu S Z. Genetic and transcriptomic dissection of host defense to Goss's bacterial wilt and leaf blight of maize[J]. G3, 2023, 13(11):jkad197.doi:10.1093/g3journal/jkad197.
[51]	赵野, 刘威, 王贺, 吴华鑫, 肖雅楠, 闫永庆. 外源CaCl₂对盐胁迫下西伯利亚白刺活性氧代谢的影响[J]. 植物生理学报, 2021, 57(5):1105-1112.doi:10.13592/j.cnki.ppj.2021.0002.
	Zhao Y, Liu W, Wang H, Wu H X, Xiao Y N, Yan Y Q. Effects of exogenous CaCl₂ on reactive oxygen species metabolism in Nitraria sibirica under NaCl stress[J]. Plant Physiology Journal, 2021, 57(5):1105-1112.
[1]	程锦, 闫磊, 曾钰, 曾紫君, 侯佳玉, 张雅茹, 姜存仓. 根系对酸胁迫的应激反应及硼调控耐酸机制的研究进展[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2021, 27(7):1273-1281.doi:10.11674/zwyf.20521.
	Cheng J, Yan L, Zeng Y, Zeng Z J, Hou J Y, Zhang Y R, Jiang C C. Root response to acid stress and the mechanism of acid tolerance regulated by boron[J]. Journal of plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2021, 27(7):1273-1281.
[2]	路亚, 王春晓, 王丽丽, 于天一, 郑永美, 吴正锋, 李林, 王才斌. 花生幼苗对酸胁迫的生理响应及品种间差异[J]. 华北农学报, 2020, 35(1):73-80.doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20190535.
[52]	Dong S K, Wang X, Li X M, Tian Y M, Zhou X Y, Qu Z P, Wang X Y, Liu L J. Mechanism of mepiquat chloride regulating soybean response to drought stress revealed by proteomics[J]. Plants, 2023, 12(10):2037.doi:10.3390/plants12102037. URL
[53]	Long A, Zhang J, Yang L T, Ye X, Lai N W, Tan L L, Lin D, Chen L S. Effects of low pH on photosynthesis,related physiological parameters,and nutrient profiles of Citrus[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2017, 8:185.doi:10.3389/fpls.2017.00185. pmid: 28270819

基因名称 Genes	引物名称 Primers	引物序列(5'—3') Primer sequences(5'—3')	产物大小/bp Product size	基因序列号 Gene ID
CsPOD	POD-F	GGAAGAGAGTCGGTTGCCT	198	Cs_ont_2g019550.1
	POD-R	TGTGTCGCCTTTGCCAGT	198
CsCAT	CAT-F	CTTTGACCCACTTGATGTAACC	149	Cs_ont_3g001020.1
	CAT-R	TGCCAGGAACCACAATAGC	149
CsSOD	SOD-F	ACAGCACAATGGTGAAAGCA	202	Cs_ont_3g017770.2
	SOD-R	GGGTTAAAGTGGGGTCCG	202
CsPAL	PAL-F	AACTCGGTGAATGACAATCCC	120	Cs_ont_6g020620.1
	PAL-R	TGCCGCAATAGCCAAACG	120
Actin	Actin-F	CCGAGCGTGGTTATTCTTTC	123	—
	Actin-R	CTGAGCTGGTCTTTGCTGTCT	123

基因名称 Genes	引物名称 Primers	引物序列(5'—3') Primer sequences(5'—3')	产物大小/bp Product size	基因序列号 Gene ID
CsPOD	POD-F	GGAAGAGAGTCGGTTGCCT	198	Cs_ont_2g019550.1
	POD-R	TGTGTCGCCTTTGCCAGT	198
CsCAT	CAT-F	CTTTGACCCACTTGATGTAACC	149	Cs_ont_3g001020.1
	CAT-R	TGCCAGGAACCACAATAGC	149
CsSOD	SOD-F	ACAGCACAATGGTGAAAGCA	202	Cs_ont_3g017770.2
	SOD-R	GGGTTAAAGTGGGGTCCG	202
CsPAL	PAL-F	AACTCGGTGAATGACAATCCC	120	Cs_ont_6g020620.1
	PAL-R	TGCCGCAATAGCCAAACG	120
Actin	Actin-F	CCGAGCGTGGTTATTCTTTC	123	—
	Actin-R	CTGAGCTGGTCTTTGCTGTCT	123

处理 Treatments	株高生长量/mm Plant height increment	叶面积/cm² Leaf area	鲜质量/g Fresh weight
pH 6.5	49.21±2.56a	2 638.86±629.01a	98.33±8.33a
pH 5.5	44.76±3.43ab	1 482.69±178.58b	78.89±9.99abc
pH 4.5	39.43±2.33b	1 284.07±79.87b	68.89±9.99bc
pH 3.5	38.38±2.80b	938.28±57.71b	59.22±5.68c

处理 Treatments	株高生长量/mm Plant height increment	叶面积/cm² Leaf area	鲜质量/g Fresh weight
pH 6.5	49.21±2.56a	2 638.86±629.01a	98.33±8.33a
pH 5.5	44.76±3.43ab	1 482.69±178.58b	78.89±9.99abc
pH 4.5	39.43±2.33b	1 284.07±79.87b	68.89±9.99bc
pH 3.5	38.38±2.80b	938.28±57.71b	59.22±5.68c

处理 Treatments	净光合速率/(μmol/ (m²·s)) Assimilation rate			蒸腾速率/(mmol/(m²·s)) Transportation rate				气孔导度/(mmol/(m²·s)) Stomatal conductance		气孔限制值 Stomatal limitation
处理 Treatments	0 h	56 d		0 h		56 d		0 h	56 d	0 h		56 d
pH 6.5	5.43±2.51a	5.45±0.39a		4.33±0.29ab		3.60±0.49a		241.67±45.95a	218.50±50.43a	-0.14			-0.12
pH 5.5	7.47±0.92a	5.87±0.40a		5.60±0.40a		2.78±0.15ab		261.00±32.71a	124.56±10.31b	-0.13			-0.23
pH 4.5	7.35±0.66a	5.40±0.66a		4.00±0.52b		2.37±0.32b		214.50±47.63a	104.75±18.05b	-0.20			-0.31
pH 3.5	6.85±0.65a	5.67±0.62a		4.73±0.35ab		3.35±0.58ab		280.29±44.28a	152.00±8.00ab	-0.14			-0.32
处理 Treatments	水分利用率/% Water use efficiency				蒸气压亏/mb Vapor pressure deficit				胞间CO₂浓度/(cm³/m³) Intercellular CO₂ concentration
处理 Treatments	0 h		56 d		0 h		56 d		0 h		56 d
pH 6.5	1.30±0.62a		1.58±0.09c		2.07±0.23a		1.93±0.17b		300.67±27.42a		298.75±4.77a
pH 5.5	1.43±0.28a		2.17±0.19b		1.65±0.19a		2.39±0.08a		303.83±14.83a		260.44±10.01b
pH 4.5	1.85±0.87a		2.63±0.22ab		2.20±0.17a		2.53±0.09a		279.00±7.51a		234.33±10.17b
pH 3.5	1.30±0.26b		2.24±0.15a		2.09±0.14a		2.08±0.07b		300.00±13.85a		229.00±8.32b

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容