Pedosphere 20(4): 515--524, 2010
ISSN 1002-0160/CN 32-1315/P
©2010 Soil Science Society of China
Published by Elsevier B.V. and Science Press
Response of two Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus) cultivars differing in tolerance to salt treatment |
LONG Xiao-Hua1, HUANG Zeng-Rong1, HUANG Yu-Ling1, KANG Jian1, ZHANG Zhen-Hua2 and LIU Zhao-Pu2 |
1 College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095 (China); 2 Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, School of Earth and Environment, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley WA 6009 (Australia) |
ABSTRACT |
To explore genetic variability for two Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus) cultivars, N1 (the sixth-generation cultivated with 75% seawater irrigation for six years) and N7 (a general variety), a experiment was conducted to study the changes in physiological attributes under different concentrations (0%, 10% and 25% of seawater concentration in greenhouse and 0%, 30% and 50% of seawater concentration in the field) of seawater salinity stress. In the greenhouse experiment, decreases of dry growth rate, but increases of dry matter percentage and membrane injury occurred in both the genotypes at 10% and 25% seawater treatments, although lesser cell membrane damage was observed in N1 than N7. N1 accumulated greater contents of Na+, Cl-, soluble sugar and proline in leaves compared with N7. In the field experiment, the yields of shoot, root and tuber, and the contents of total-sugar and inulin in tubers of N1 were higher than those of N7. Lesser degree of salt injury in N1 indicated that the relatively salt-tolerant cultivar had higher K+/Na+ ratio, lower Na+/Ca2+ ratio, and the salt-induced enhancement of osmotic adjustment. |
Key Words: cell membrane stability, genetic variabilities, inorganic ions, malondialdehyde, seawater salinity stress |
Citation: Long, X. H., Huang, Z. R., Huang, Y. L., Kang, J., Zhang, Z. H. and Liu, Z. P. 2010. Response of two Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus) cultivars differing in tolerance to salt treatment. Pedosphere. 20(4): 515-524. |
View Full Text
|
|
|
|