干热河谷区典型植物生长与光合生理特性对干旱胁迫的响应

Responses of growth and photosynthetic physiological characteristics of typical plants to drought stress in the dry-hot valley

摘要

【目的】探究干旱胁迫对银合欢、葛藤和木豆生长与光合生理特性的影响，评价3种典型植物抗旱性，为干热河谷耐旱植物筛选与植被恢复实践提供理论依据。【方法】以3种植物1年生幼苗为试验材料，采用盆栽控水试验，设置对照（CK，土壤含水量为田间持水量的75%~80%）、轻度干旱（LD，土壤含水量为田间持水量的60%~65%）、中度干旱（MD，土壤含水量为田间持水量的45%~50%）、重度干旱（SD，土壤含水量为田间持水量的30%~35%）4个处理。测定各处理条件下3种植物的生长与光合生理指标，并采用隶属函数法综合评价抗旱性。【结果】（1）随着干旱加剧，3种植物的株高增长量（Δ H）、地径增长量（Δ D）、叶片相对含水量（RWC）、净光合速率（ P_n）、气孔导度（ G_s）、蒸腾速率（ T_r）、羧化效率（CE）及PSⅡ最大光化学效率（ F_v/ F_m）是下降趋势，水分饱和亏缺（WSD）、丙二醛（MDA）和脯氨酸（Pro）含量是上升趋势。（2）胞间CO₂浓度（ C_i）在LD胁迫时降低，在MD和SD胁迫时升高。（3）银合欢和葛藤的水分利用效率（WUE）在LD和MD时升高，在SD时降低；木豆的WUE随干旱加剧持续下降。（4）随着干旱加剧，3种植物的初始荧光（ F_o）先升高后降低；银合欢和木豆的最大荧光（ F_m）和可变荧光（ F_v）先升高后降，而葛藤持续下降。PSII潜在活性（ F_v/ F_o）在不同物种间差异明显，葛藤在MD至SD阶段上升，银合欢和木豆在整个干旱过程中持续下降。（5）相关性分析显示，Δ H与 P_n、 G_s、 T_r及叶绿素荧光参数（ F_m、 F_v、 F_v/ F_o、 F_v/ F_m）呈极显著正相关（ P<0.01）；RWC与Δ H和Δ D、 P_n和 G_s呈极显著正相关（ P<0.01），与WSD呈负相关；MDA与 P_n、 G_s呈极显著负相关（ P<0.01），且叶绿素荧光参数（ F_m、 F_v、 F_v/ F_o、 F_v/ F_m）之间相关性强。【结论】干旱胁迫显著抑制3种植物幼苗生长并降低生理活性，造成叶片细胞膜受损、植株生长减缓。幼苗通过渗透调节、降低气孔导度与蒸腾速率以增强抗旱适应性，维持相对稳定的代谢水平。综合生长、生理与光合作用指标可知，抗旱性为葛藤>银合欢>木豆，干热河谷区植被恢复建议以葛藤为首选物种、银合欢为伴生物种。

Abstract

[Objective] This paper aims to investigate the effects of drought stress on growth and photosynthetic physiological characteristics of Leucaena leucocephala, Pueraria montana, and Cajanus cajan, and to evaluate the drought resistance of these three typical plants, providing theoretical basis for the selection of drought-tolerant plants and vegetation restoration in the dry-hot valley. [Method] Using one-year-old seedlings of these three species as experimental materials, a pot experiment with controlled water supply was conducted. Four treatments were set as followings: control (CK, soil moisture content was 75%–80% of field capacity), mild drought (LD, 60%−65% of field capacity), moderate drought (MD, 45%−50% of field capacity), and severe drought (SD, 30%−35% of field capacity). The growth and photosynthetic physiological indicators of the three species under each treatment were measured, and the drought resistance was evaluated by membership function method. [Result] (1) With the intensification of drought, plant height and ground diameter growth, relative water content of leaves, net photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, transpiration rate, carboxylation efficiency, and maximum photochemical efficiency of PSII decreased, while the water saturation deficit, malondialdehyde, and proline contents increased. (2) The intercellular CO₂ concentration decreased under MD stress, and increased under MD and SD stress. (3) The water use efficiency (WUE) of Leucaena leucocephala and P. montana increased under LD and MD stress, but decreased under SD stress; the WUE of Cajanus cajan continuously decreased with the intensification of drought. (4) The initial fluorescence of the three species increased first and then decreased with the intensification of drought; the maximum fluorescence and variable fluorescence of L. leucocephala and C. cajan increased first and then decreased, while that of P. montana continuously decreased. The potential activity of PSII varied significantly among varied species, with P. montana increasing from MD to SD, and L. leucocephala and C. cajan continuously decreasing throughout the drought process. (5) Correlation analysis showed that plant height growth was significantly positively correlated with net photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, transpiration rate, and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters (P<0.01); the relative water content was significantly positively correlated with plant height and ground diameter growth, net photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, and water saturation deficit, and negatively correlated with malondialdehyde (P<0.01); the chlorophyll fluorescence parameters were strongly correlated with each other. [Conclusion] Drought stress significantly inhibites the growth of three plant seedlings and reduces their physiological activities, causing damage to the cell membranes of leaves and slowing down the growth of plants. The seedlings enhance their drought adaptability through osmotic regulation and reducing stomatal conductance and transpiration rate, maintaining a relatively stable metabolic level. The comprehensive evaluation indicates that the drought resistance of the three species decreases from strong to weak is P. montana, L. leucocephala and C. cajan. For vegetation restoration in the dry-hot valley, it is recommended to choose P. montana as the preferred species, with L. leucocephala as the companion species.

关键词

干热河谷 / 干旱胁迫 / 光合生理特性 / 抗旱性评价 / 植被恢复

Key words

dry-hot valley / drought stress / photosynthetic physiological characteristics / evaluation of drought resistance / vegetation restoration

参考文献

[1] 杨佳伟, 戴薛, 辜忠春, 等. 4种不同根型树种对干旱胁迫的生理响应差异：基于光合−荧光−渗透调节的协同分析[J].生态学报, 2026, 46(5): 2654-2667.

[2] Yang J W, Dai X, Gu Z C, et al. Differences in physiological responses to drought stress among four tree species with different root types: a synergistic analysis based on photosynthesis-fluorescence-osmosis regulation[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2026, 46(5): 2654-2667.

[3] Oguz M C, Aycan M, Oguz E, et al. Drought stress tolerance in plants: interplay of molecular, biochemical and physiological responses in important development stages[J].Physiologia, 2022, 2(4): 180-197.

[4] Zhang Y, Xu J, Li R, et al. Plants’ response to abiotic stress: Mechanisms and strategies[J].International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2023, 24(13): 10915.

[5] 梁青兰, 韩友吉, 乔艳辉, 等. 干旱胁迫对黑杨派无性系生长及生理特性的影响[J].北京林业大学学报, 2023, 45(10): 81-89.

[6] Liang Q L, Han Y J, Qiao Y H, et al. Effects of drought stress on the growth and physiological characteristics of Sect. Aigeiros clones[J].Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2023, 45(10): 81-89.

[7] 张冰彬, 张琳琳, 于明含, 等. 油莎豆的抗旱性评价及抗旱生理机制研究[J].北京林业大学学报, 2022, 44(4): 107-115.

[8] Zhang B B, Zhang L L, Yu M H, et al. Evaluation of drought resistant ability and physiological mechanism in drought resistance of Cyperus esculentus var. sativus [J].Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2022, 44(4): 107-115.

[9] 曾子弘, 张哲文, 孙永江, 等. 沙棘形态和光合系统对干旱、盐碱及其复合胁迫的响应[J].北京林业大学学报, 2026, 48(1): 88-101.

[10] Zeng Z H, Zhang Z W, Sun Y J, et al. Response of Hippophae rhamnoides morphology and photosynthetic system to drought, salt alkali and their combined stress[J].Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2026, 48(1): 88-101.

[11] 白思璐, 周明涛, 刘志敏, 等. 干旱胁迫对护坡植物柠条生理特性的影响[J/OL].生态学报, 2026, 39(9): 1-13[2026−05−05].https://doi.org/10.20103/j.stxb.202507051746.

[12] Bai S L, Zhou M T, Liu Z M, et al. Effects of drought stress on physiological characteristics of slope protection plant Caragana korshinskii [J/OL].Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2026, 39(9): 1-13 [2026−05−05].https://doi.org/10.20103/j.stxb.202507051746.

[13] 黄榆婷, 杨源通, 朱洁怡, 等. 不同土壤水分下香樟幼苗生长生理响应与抗旱机制[J/OL].生态学杂志, 1-11[2026−05−05].https://link.cnki.net/urlid/21.1148.Q.20260131.1345.002.

[14] Huang Y T, Yang Y T, Zhu J Y, et al. Physiological responses and drought resistance mechanisms of Cinnamomum camphora seedlings under different soil moisture[J/OL].Chinese Journal of Ecology, 1-11[2026−05−05].https://link.cnki.net/urlid/21.1148.Q.20260131.1345.002.

[15] 冯潇, 田玲, 尹群, 等. 3种玉兰幼苗生长和生理特性对干旱胁迫的响应[J].北京林业大学学报, 2024, 46(9): 57-67.

[16] Feng X, Tian L, Yin Q, et al. Response of growth and physiological characteristics of three Magnolia spp. seedlings to drought stress[J].Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2024, 46(9): 57-67.

[17] 钟湧, 高磊, 彭新华. 南方红壤区季节性干旱研究进展[J].土壤, 2025, 57(6): 1313-1322.

[18] Zhong Y, Gao L, Peng X H. Review of seasonal drought in the red soil region of southern China[J].Soils, 2025, 57(6): 1313-1322.

[19] 张伦, 张宇龙, 夏振尧, 等. 干热河谷区高陡岩质边坡生态修复效果评价[J].应用生态学报, 2025, 36(12): 3636-3646.

[20] Zhang L, Zhang Y L, Xia Z Y, et al. Evaluation of ecological restoration effect of high-steep rocky slopes in dry-hot valley region[J].Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2025, 36(12): 3636-3646.

[21] Xiong D H, Zhou H Y, Yang Z, et al. Slope lithologic property, soil moisture condition and revegetation in dry-hot valley of Jinsha River[J].Chinese Geographical Science, 2005, 15(2): 186-192.

[22] Feng J, Chen G, Duan X, et al. Time-lag and accumulation responses of vegetation to precipitation in the Jinsha River dry-hot valley at multiple spatial-temporal scales[J].Journal of Hydrology, 2025, 661(Part A): 133605.

[23] Lin Y M, Cui P, Ge Y G, et al. The succession characteristics of soil erosion during different vegetation succession stages in dry-hot river valley of Jinsha River, upper reaches of Yangtze River[J].Ecological Engineering, 2014, 62: 13-26.

[24] 马焕成, 伍建榕, 郑艳玲, 等. 干热河谷的形成特征与植被恢复相关问题探析[J].西南林业大学学报(自然科学), 2020, 40(3): 1-8, 197.

[25] Ma H C, Wu J R, Zheng Y L, et al. Discussion on the formation characteristics of dry-hot valley and related problems of revegetation[J].Journal of Southwest Forestry University (Natural Sciences), 2020, 40(3): 1-8, 197.

[26] 龙会英, 张德, 朱红业, 等. 元谋干热河谷豆科牧草的引种试验[J].草业科学, 2011, 28(8): 1485-1490.

[27] Long H Y, Zhang D, Zhu H Y, et al. Introduction experiment of leguminous forages in the dry and hot valley of Yuanmou region[J].Pratacultural Science, 2011, 28(8): 1485-1490.

[28] 郑霞, 王延周, 王郝为, 等. 不同葛藤品种藤蔓的生长特性与饲用品质研究[J].草地学报, 2018, 26(2): 409-413.

[29] Zheng X, Wang Y Z, Wang H W, et al. A study on the growth characteristics and evaluation of forage nutritional quality of the vine in different kudzu (Pueraria thomsonii Benth.) varieties[J].Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2018, 26(2): 409-413.

[30] 张尚云, 高洁, 傅美芬, 等. 金沙江干热河谷恢复植被与造林技术研究[J].西南林学院学报, 1997, 17(2): 3-9.

[31] Zhang S Y, Gao J, Fu M F, et al. A study on vegetational restoration and silvicultural techniques in the dry-hot valley of the Jinsha River[J].Journal of Southwest Forestry College, 1997, 17(2): 3-9.

[32] 闫春娟, 王昌陵, 孙旭刚, 等. 不同时期水分胁迫对大豆根系特性及产量的影响[J].节水灌溉, 2024(8): 43-52.

[33] Yan C J, Wang C L, Sun X G, et al. Effect of water stress in different phases on root characteristics and yield of soybean[J].Water Saving Irrigation, 2024(8): 43-52.

[34] 马沈轲, 王春梅, 赵春林, 等. 西北干旱半干旱地区节水增汇植物种类筛选[J].北京林业大学学报, 2024, 46(8): 122-131.

[35] Ma S K, Wang C M, Zhao C L, et al. Screening of water-saving and sink-enhancing plant species in arid and semi-arid regions of Northwest China[J].Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2024, 46(8): 122-131.

[36] 谭景晨, 赵丽丽, 张淑炜, 等. 干旱胁迫对葛藤种苗生理特性的影响[J].农业与技术, 2020, 40(22): 17-20.

[37] Tan J C, Zhao L L, Zhang S W, et al. Effects of drought stress on physiological characteristics of kudzu vine seedlings[J].Agriculture and Technology, 2020, 40(22): 17-20.

[38] 李登峰, 冯秋红, 胡宗达, 等. 金沙江干热河谷新银合欢(Leucaena leucocephala)的光合与荧光特征干湿季对比研究[J].生态学报, 2020, 40(12): 4105-4113.

[39] Li D F, Feng Q H, Hu Z D, et al. Comparative study on photosynthetic physiological and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics of Leucaena leucocephala in wet and dry season, Jinsha River dry-hot valley, China[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(12): 4105-4113.

[40] 魏一凡, 杨清, 宋治华, 等. 干旱胁迫对木豆叶片的影响及机理验证[J].东北林业大学学报, 2024, 52(9): 36-45.

[41] Wei Y F, Yang Q, Song Z H, et al. Effects of drought stress on Cajanus cajan leaves and mechanism verification[J].Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 2024, 52(9): 36-45.

[42] 穆寅生, 张鸽香, 李立婷, 等. 4种毛茛科植物对干旱胁迫的光合生理响应及抗旱性评价[J].中国野生植物资源, 2024, 43(6): 37-43.

[43] Mu Y S, Zhang G X, Li L T, et al. Photosynthesis physiological response and drought resistance evaluation of four Ranunculaceae species under drought stress[J].Chinese Wild Plant Resources, 2024, 43(6): 37-43.

[44] 戴文静, 丁彦芬, 赵洢, 等. 干旱胁迫对3种紫堇属植物生理及光合特性的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2025, 53(12): 164-174.

[45] Dai W J, Ding Y F, Zhao Y, et al. Effects of drought stress on physiological and photosynthetic characteristics of three species of Corydali [J].Journal of Northwest A&F University (Natural Science Edition), 2025, 53(12): 164-174.

[46] 肖姣娣. 3种刺篱植物对干旱胁迫的生理生化响应[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 43(7): 155-160.

[47] Xiao J D. Physiological and biochemical responses of three spiny plants to drought stress[J].Journal of Northwest A&F University (Natural Science Edition), 2015, 43(7): 155-160.

[48] 胡衍平, 刘卫东, 庞文胜, 等. 水分胁迫对山乌桕幼苗生长及生理生化的影响[J].中南林业科技大学学报, 2023, 43(8): 62-72.

[49] Hu Y P, Liu W D, Pang W S, et al. Effects of water stress on the growth, physiological and biochemical characteristics of Sapium discolor seedlings[J].Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 2023, 43(8): 62-72.

[50] 路之娟, 张永清, 张楚, 等. 不同基因型苦荞苗期抗旱性综合评价及指标筛选[J].中国农业科学, 2017, 50(17): 3311-3322.

[51] Lu Z J, Zhang Y Q, Zhang C, et al. Comprehensive evaluation and indicators of the drought resistance of different genotypes of Fagopyrum tataricum at seedling stage[J].Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(17): 3311-3322.

[52] 高昆, 石义妃. 干旱胁迫对粉葛幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[J].江苏农业科学, 2021, 49(8): 153-157.

[53] Gao K, Shi Y F. Effects of drought stress on the growth and physiological characteristics of Pueraria loba seedlings[J].Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 49(8): 153-157.

[54] 李绍家, 侯开卫, 刘凤书, 等. 几种紫胶虫优良寄主树的自然分布概况及耐旱性与水分生理[J].林业科学研究, 1997, 10(5): 70-75.

[55] Li S J, Hou K W, Liu F S, et al. Natural distribution overview and drought tolerance and water physiology of several excellent host trees of lac beetles[J].Forest Research, 1997, 10(5): 70-75.

[56] 校亮, 熊东红, 张宝军, 等. 葛藤覆被下干热河谷冲沟沟岸土壤水热变化特征[J].生态学报, 2018, 38(2): 646-656.

[57] Xiao L, Xiong D H, Zhang B J, et al. Effect of kudzu coverage on soil moisture and temperature in the gully bank of the dry-hot valley region[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(2): 646-656.

[58] 王家宜, 余涵霞, 赖玉芳, 等. 入侵杂草薇甘菊与本地植物粉葛对水分胁迫的生理响应[J].生物多样性, 2017, 25(12): 1267-1275.

[59] Wang J Y, Yu H X, Lai Y F, et al. Physiological response of the invasive weed Mikania micrantha and the native species Pueraria lobata var. thomsonii to water stress[J].Biodiversity Science, 2017, 25(12): 1267-1275.

[60] 王兴荣, 张彦军, 李玥, 等. 干旱胁迫对大豆生长的影响及抗旱性评价方法与指标筛选[J].植物遗传资源学报, 2018, 19(1): 49-56.

[61] Wang X R, Zhang Y J, Li Y, et al. Effects of drought stress on growth and screening methods and indexes for drought-resistance in soybean[J].Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2018, 19(1): 49-56.

[62] 石磊琦, 刘梓钰, 王超俊, 等. 水分和土壤微生物对干热河谷山合欢和银合欢生长性状的影响[J].广西植物, 2024, 44(11): 2125-2140.

[63] Shi L Q, Liu Z Y, Wang C J, et al. Effects of water and soil microorganisms on the growth traits of Albizia kalkora and Leucaena leucocephala in a dry-hot valley[J].Guihaia, 2024, 44(11): 2125-2140.

[64] 韩姣姣, 段旭, 赵洋毅. 金沙江干热河谷不同植被坡面土壤水分时空分布特征[J].干旱区地理, 2019, 42(1): 121-129.

[65] Han J J, Duan X, Zhao Y Y. Spatial and temporal variability of soil moisture on slope land of different vegetation of dry-hot valley in Jinsha River[J].Arid Land Geography, 2019, 42(1): 121-129.

[66] Jiang H, Zeng Y Y, Liu X D, et al. Rooting for survival: ABA-mediated hormonal integration driving primary root elongation under drought stress[J].Journal of Plant Ecology, 2026, 19(2): 1.

[67] 唐立松, 张建龙, 李彦, 等. 植物对土壤水分变化的响应与控制性分根交替灌溉[J].干旱区研究, 2005, 22(1): 90-93.

[68] Tang L S, Zhang J L, Li Y, et al. Response of plants to the change of soil moisture content and the controlled alternative partial root-zone irrigation[J].Arid Zone Research, 2005, 22(1): 90-93.

[69] 王琼, 宋桂龙, 韩烈保, 等. 5种野生护坡植物的抗旱综合性评价[J].福建农林大学学报(自然科学版), 2008, 37(2): 153-157.

[70] Wang Q, Song G L, Han L B, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance of 5 wild plant species applied to slope eco-engineering[J].Journal of Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University(Natural Science Edition), 2008, 37(2): 153-157.

[71] Singh D, Mathimaran N, Boller T, et al. Deep-rooted pigeon pea promotes the water relations and survival of shallow-rooted finger millet during drought-despite strong competitive interactions at ambient water availability[J].PLoS ONE, 2020, 15(2): e0228993.

[72] Gupta D, Regon P, Mai H J, et al. Transcriptional regulation reveals potent drought tolerance mechanisms in contrasting genotypes of Cajanus cajan (L.) Millspaugh[J].BMC Plant Biology, 2025, 25(1): 1287.

[73] 杨艳鲜, 方海东, 潘志贤, 等. 云南元谋干热河谷区旱坡地不同生态农业模式土壤水分差异性分析[J].干旱地区农业研究, 2009, 27(2): 248-252.

[74] Yang Y X, Fang H D, Pan Z X, et al. Variability in soil moisture under four eco-agricultural models on dry slope land in Yuanmou dry-hot valley[J].Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2009, 27(2): 248-252.

[75] 邵怡若, 许建新, 薛立, 等. 5种绿化树种幼苗对干旱胁迫和复水的生理响应[J].生态科学, 2013, 32(4): 420-428.

[76] Shao Y R, Xu J X, Xue L, et al. Physiological responses of five greening seedlings to drought stress and rewatering[J].Ecological Science, 2013, 32(4): 420-428.

[77] 李玲, 徐志防, 韦霄, 等. 金钟藤和葛藤在干旱与复水条件下的生理比较[J].广西植物, 2008, 28(6): 806-810.

[78] Li L, Xu Z F, Wei X, et al. Physiological compare Merremia boisiana with Pueraria lobata under drought stress and rewatering conditions[J].Guihaia, 2008, 28(6): 806-810.

[79] 陈坤荣, 周蛟. 薪炭林树种对PEG诱导水分胁迫的生理反应[J].西南林学院学报, 1994, 14(3): 149-154.

[80] Chen K R, Zhou J. Physiological rsponse of fuelwood tree species to PEG-induced water stress[J].Journal of Southwest Forestry University(Natural Sciences), 1994, 14(3): 149-154.

[81] 商成慧, 周泽宇, 崔文雪, 等. 大豆脯氨酸积累相关基因家族鉴定及干旱胁迫表达分析[J].植物遗传资源学报, 2022, 23(6): 1793-1806.

[82] Shang C H, Zhou Z Y, Cui W X, et al. Identification and expression analysis of proline accumulation related gene families in soybean under drought stress[J].Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2022, 23(6): 1793-1806.

[83] 李明, 王根轩. 干旱胁迫对甘草幼苗保护酶活性及脂质过氧化作用的影响[J].生态学报, 2002, 22(4): 503-507.

[84] Li M, Wang G X. Effect of drought stress on activities of cell defense enzymes and lipid peroxidation in Glycyrrhiza uralensis seedlings[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2002, 22(4): 503-507.

[85] Zhi Q Q, Chen Y, Hu H, et al. Physiological and transcriptome analyses reveal tissue-specific responses of leucaena plants to drought stress[J].Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2024, 214: 108926.

[86] 陈少瑜, 郎南军, 贾利强, 等. 干旱胁迫对坡柳等抗旱树种幼苗膜脂过氧化及保护酶活性的影响[J].植物研究, 2006, 26(1): 89-93.

[87] Chen S Y, Lang N J, Jia L Q, et al. Effects of drought stress on lipid peroxidation and activity of defense enzymes of Dodonaea viscosa, Leucaena leucocephala and Tephrosia candida seedlings[J].Bulletin of Botanical Research, 2006, 26(1): 89-93.

[88] 崔凯, 李昆, 孙永玉, 等. 云南元谋干热河谷地区6种植物种子的抗逆生理特性[J].东北林业大学学报, 2008, 36(11): 55-58.

[89] Cui K, Li K, Sun Y Y, et al. Physiological characteristics of stress-resistance for seeds of six species of plants in Yuanmou dry and hot valley of Yunnan[J].Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 2008, 36(11): 55-58.

[90] 许翩翩, 王建柱. 边坡先锋植物木豆的抗旱性[J].安徽农业科学, 2016, 44(20): 1−3, 7.

[91] Xu P P, Wang J Z. Drought resistance research for slope pioneer plant Cajanus cajan [J].Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 44(20): 1−3, 7.

[92] 卢广超, 许建新, 薛立, 等. 干旱胁迫下4种常用植物幼苗的光合和荧光特性综合评价[J].生态学报, 2013, 33(24): 7872-7881.

[93] Lu G C, Xu J X, Xue L, et al. Comprehensive evaluation on photosynthetic and fluorescence characteristics in seedlings of 4 drought resistance species[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(24): 7872-7881.

[94] Song X, Zhou G, He Q, et al. Stomatal limitations to photosynthesis and their critical water conditions in different growth stages of maize under water stress[J].Agricultural Water Management, 2020, 241: 106330.

[95] Page M T, Parry M A J. Shining light on photosynthesis[J].Journal of Experimental Botany, 2025, 76(12): 3243-3246.

[96] 程爽, 李卓琳, 胡海玲, 等. 植物光系统Ⅱ(PSⅡ)应答非生物胁迫机理研究进展[J].生物技术通报, 2023, 39(12): 33-42.

[97] Cheng S, Li Z L, Hu H L, et al. Research progress in the mechanism of plant photosystem II(PSII) responsing to abiotic stress[J].Biotechnology Bulletin, 2023, 39(12): 33-42.

[98] 段爱国, 杨文忠, 张建国, 等. 苗木离体叶片水分状况的叶绿素荧光参数定量诊断[J].浙江林学院学报, 2010, 27(4): 529-537.

[99] Duan A G, Yang W Z, Zhang J G, et al. Fluorescence parameters for drought stress diagnosis in detached leaves of ten tree species[J].Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2010, 27(4): 529-537.

基金资助

中国三峡建工（集团）有限公司科研项目(BHT/0980)