免费文献传递   相关文献

Effects of Naphthalene Acetic Acid on the Shooting Growth and Aboveground Biomass of Hemarthria compressa

萘乙酸对扁穗牛鞭草生长发育及地上部生物量的影响



全 文 :!23" !3#
 Vol.23  No.3
! " # $
ACTA AGRESTIA SINICA
   2015$  5%
  May.  2015
犱狅犻:10.11733/j.issn.10070435.2015.03.009
犈犳犳犲犮狋狊狅犳犖犪狆犺狋犺犪犾犲狀犲犃犮犲狋犻犮犃犮犻犱狅狀狋犺犲犛犺狅狅狋犻狀犵犌狉狅狑狋犺犪狀犱犃犫狅狏犲犵狉狅狌狀犱
犅犻狅犿犪狊狊狅犳犎犲犿犪狉狋犺狉犻犪犮狅犿狆狉犲狊狊犪
YANYanhong,LIJunlin,CHENTianfeng,LUOYan,ZHANGXinquan
(DepartmentofGrasslandScience,ColegeofAnimalScienceandTechnology,SichuanAgriculture
University,Ya’an,SichuanProvince625014,China)
犃犫狊狋狉犪犮狋:Theapplicationofbiochemicalstimulantsisasimplerapproachtoenhanceaboveground
biomass,achievehigherproductivityandlowercoststhangeneticmodification.Theimpactsof
naphthaleneaceticacidonthegrowthspeedandabovegroundbiomassoflimpograss(犎犲犿犪狉狋犺狉犻犪
犮狅犿狆狉犲狊狊犪)wereinvestigatedbysoakingthecuttingsindifferentdosages(0~400mg·L-1)of
NAAfordifferentsoakingdurations(10~30min).Limpograss“Ya’an”,releasedbytheChina
ForageRegistrationCommittee,wasusedintheYangtzeRiverthatplayedanimportantrolein
animalhusbandryandprotectionenvironment.Itwasfoundthatthegrowthspeedfrom30dto
58dafterplanting,plantheight,freshabovegroundbiomassanddryabovegroundbiomassofthe
firstharvestweresignificantlyinfluencedbytheNAAdosage.Treatmentwiththelowerdosage
ofNAAincreasedtheseparameters,whereashigherdosageNAAsuppressedtheseparameters.
Similarly,freshabovegroundbiomassanddryabovegroundbiomassofsecondharvestincreased
withthelowerdosage(100and200mg·L-1)ofNAA.Furthermore,theinteractiveeffectbe
tweenNAAdosageandsoakingdurationsignificantlyaffectedthegrowthspeedandaboveground
biomassoflimpograss.Overal,theresultssuggestedthat200mg·L-1 NAAand20minsoa
kingdurationcouldbeusedtomaximizegrowthspeedandproducehighabovegroundbiomass,
thepromotionofNAAinducedintheabovegroundbiomassoflimpograsspersistedfortwoyears
of2011and2012.
犓犲狔狑狅狉犱狊:Limpograss;Clonalpropagation;Naphthaleneaceticacid;Abovegroundbiomass;
Soakingduration
UVWÁXYZ[*Ñ"ûÊ1+ð\ѺåoÔÕ
¬­®

2 ¯

°±²

³ ´,š"

¥¦®÷à.×&-„./

¥¦ V!625014)
EFGH
:20140630;IJGH:20141205
KLMN

,Ú®÷Í÷„…2ùՋ߿
(CARS3505);¸ ¹“´ Ãê”-„º»¼^¿¥(2011BAD17B03)ÀÁ
OPQR

W¦—
(1981),á,r0õX§,ÊË,ŒÜY,mVÏÐc]Z"QúRÌÍ,Email:yanyanhong3588284@126.com;:6
x×Authorforcorrespondence,Email:zhangxq@sicau.edu.cn
67

P

V!

JBJç]
(犎犲犿犪狉狋犺狉犻犪犮狅犿狆狉犲狊狊犪)_íþ,Ì͋ŒI[û½(NAA)‡ejH\Žh<|ñ·’;Q4†
Uñ&"IÕÖ

€a+›
,NAA‡e<†;ñ=â‡5x¤

чe°âXOx¤

NC
,NAA‡ejH\Žh<†;)ñ=I†x>­œ‹,PNAA‡e200
mg·L-1,H\20minË5¢|ñ·+,z2,çùÍ>­)b,ŠË5_JBJç]^_GÌz©ªI\.D]Ö³。
89:

JBJç]

ÿñGÌ

[û½

4†Uñ&"

H\Žh
;<,-=
:S543.9    >?@AB:A     >CD=:10070435(2015)03048907
  Limpograss(犎犲犿犪狉狋犺狉犻犪犮狅犿狆狉犲狊狊犪),awarm
seasonperennialgrass,belongstothe犎犲犿犪狉狋犺狉犻犪of
Gramineae,lovingwarmandhumidclimate [1].It
couldwithstandtheshortperiodsofseasonalflood.
Limpograssisoneofthevegetativepropagationplants,
whichmainlydependsonterrestrialstems.Owingto
itslonggrowthperiod,strongresistance,vigorousre
newablepower,highvegetativeproductivity,palata
! " # $ !23"
bility,andhighdigestibility,limpograssiscultivated
asa majorforagegrass.Itis widelydistributed
throughoutsouthernChina,southcentralFlorida,and
areascharacterizedbyaflattogentlyslopingtopogra
phyandpoorlydrainedsandyareaswherestandingwa
teriscommonduringwetweather[2].
Pressurefromgrasslanddegradationandincrease
inthenumberoflivestockhasnecessitatedtheproduc
tionincreaseandrapidpropagationofthisgrass [3].
Useofthebiochemicalstimulantscouldbeanefective
waytoachievethisaim,becausetheyarerelatively
lowcost,easytoincorporatediferentmethods,and
havesignificantproductivityenhancements [4].Past
studieshadshownthattheauxinfamilyofphytohor
moneswasparticularlyefectiveininducingagrowth
responseofplant.Naphthaleneaceticacid(NAA),a
syntheticauxin,wascommonlyusedatrelativelylow
concentrationstoelicitauxintyperesponsesincel
growth,celdivision,fruitsettingandrooting [5].
Hunt犲狋犪犾.[6]reportedthatNAAwasthemostefec
tivegrowthpromoterattheconcentrationrangingfrom
2.5to10mg·L-1withthegreenalga,犆.狊狅狉狅犽犻狀犻
犪狀犪.Sofar,littleinformationisavailableonthebio
massresponseoflimpograssandtheoptimalstimulant
dosagesofNAAaswelassoakingduration.
Limpograss,oneofthebackbonegrassesinthe
developmentofanimalhusbandry,hasbeenpromoted
tomilionsofacresinthesouthernprovincesofChina
[2].Recently,ithasbeenrecognizedthattheresearchs
ontheefectofplantgrowthregulatorsarefarbehind
theworksoncytology,stressresistanceadaptability,
aggressiveness,livingaloneandalelopathicefectwith
limpograss.Traditionaly,plantgrowthregulatorsare
usedasvaluableresearchtoolstoelucidatethephysio
logicalresponsesofplantsortoprobebiochemicalcon
trolmechanisms.However,theirusecouldalsobeex
tendedtothefieldoflimpograssproductiontoenhance
thepotentialviabilityofcommercialapplications.Byi
dentifyingoptimalstimulantdosagesandsoakingdura
tionthatenhancesthebiomassproductivityoflim
pograss,itmaybeenormousbenefitforlimpograss
plantersandproducersinproductionofforagegrass
fromthesuperiorsources.
1 犕犪狋犲狉犻犪犾狊犪狀犱犕犲狋犺狅犱狊
1.1 犘犾犪狀狋犿犪狋犲狉犻犪犾犪狀犱犲狓狆犲狉犻犿犲狀狋犪犾犱犲狊犻犵狀
Thecuttingsof犎.犮狅犿狆狉犲狊狊犪“Ya’an”were
selectedfromtheFarmofSichuanAgriculturalU
niversity,whichhavebeenreleasedbytheChina
Forage Registration Committee,andhavebeen
usedintheYangtzeRiverandplayedanimportant
roleinanimalhusbandry.Experimentalstemcut
tingsof15~16cmlengthand3.0mmdiameter
with3nodeswereobtainedfromvigorouslygrow
inglimpograssattheelongationstageonthe9
Mayof2011and2012.Leaveswereremovedfrom
thecuttings,andthecuttingswereimmersedina
fungicidesolutionof0.5% Bavistin [MethylN
(1Hbenzoimidazol2yl)carbamate]for15minand
thoroughlyrinsedwithdistiledwater.Thebasal
ends(5cm)ofeachcuttingwerethensoakedin
differentconcentrations(0,100,200,300,and
400mg·L-1)ofNAAfordifferentduration(10,
20,30min)andcuttingswithouttreatmentwere
consideredascontrol.
Theblockareawas5m×2m.Limpograss
wasplantedwith33cmrowspacingand26cm
holespacing,andthedensitywas1.16×105plant
·hm-2.NetN,P2O5andK2Owereappliedasthe
basefertilizer atthe rates of 20,8 and 8
kg·hm-2,respectively.AndnetNwasappliedat
therateof20kg·hm-2aftermowing.Theother
management was done according to the high
abovegroundbiomassproductivityfield oflim
pograss.
1.2 犕犲犪狊狌狉犲犿犲狀狋犻狋犲犿狊犪狀犱犿犲狋犺狅犱狊
Growth speed:Began with 30 daysafter
planting,tenplantsweresampledrandomlyfor
eachtreatmentwiththreereplicates,plantheight
wasmeasuredat30,37,44,51and58d,then
measuredthedailygrowthspeed.
Abovegroundbiomass:Attheinitialbooting
stage,tenplantsweresampledrandomly;plant
heightsandstemdiametersweretested.Thenthe
limpograssweremowedandfresh weightswere
testedwithaninternalareaof3.73m×1.34min
everyblock.Additionaly,500gfreshgrasswas
driedtoaconstantweightat80°Cfor72hafterex
posureto105°Cfor0.5h.Lastly,thewatercon
tent was measured, and the dry weight
(abovegroundbiomass)wascalculated.
1.3 犛狋犪狋犻狊狋犻犮犪犾犪狀犪犾狔狊犻狊
Meanofthreereplicationswascalculated.The
094
!3# W¦—:[û½meanvalueswereanalyzedforsignificantdiferencesu
singafactorialanalysisofvariance(ANOVA).Statis
ticalanalysiswasperformedusingtheSASprogram
version9.1(SASInstitute,Cary,NC)andmeans
werecomparedusingtheleastsignificantdiferences
(LSD)testat犘≤0.05.
2 犚犲狊狌犾狋狊
2.1 犈犳犳犲犮狋狅犳犖犃犃狅狀狋犺犲犵狉狅狑狋犺狊狆犲犲犱狅犳犾犻犿狆狅犵狉犪狊狊
Thedailygrowthspeedoflimpograsswassignifi
cantlyafectedbyNAAdosagesandtheinteractionsof
NAAdosageandsoakingduration,butnotsoaking
duration(Table1).Inpresentstudy,thegrowth
speedofcuttingincreasedfrom30dto51dafter
planting,andthendecreased(Table1).Thegrowth
speedofcuttingreachedapeakvalueabout44d~51d
afterplanting(S3stage).Thetimeofreachingapex
wasnotchangedbyapplyingNAA,butthegrowth
speedsignificantlyincreasedinthetreatmentsof100
mg·L-1and200mg·L-1 NAAcomparedwiththe
control,andsignificantlydecreasedinthetreatmentof
400mg·L-1NAAforboth2011and2012.
Furthermore,thehighestgrowthspeedofcutting
wasobservedinthetreatmentof200mg·L-1 NAA
in2011and2012.Inthisstudy,theinteractionbe
tweenNAAandsoakingdurationshowedthatthe
growthspeedwasnotafectedbysoakingdurationin
thetreatmentofnonNAA.Themaximumvaluesof
growthspeedweremeasuredintheinteractionbetween
200mg·L-1NAAandthesoakingdurationof20mi
nutes,whichwere22.33%and37.63%higherthan
thecontrolatS3stage(44~51daysafterplanting)in
2011and2012,respectively.
犜犪犫犾犲1 犈犳犳犲犮狋狊狅犳犖犃犃犱狅狊犪犵犲犪狀犱狊狅犪犽犻狀犵犱狌狉犪狋犻狅狀狅狀狋犺犲犵狉狅狑狋犺狊狆犲犲犱狅犳犾犻犿狆狅犵狉犪狊狊犮狌狋狋犻狀犵
NAAdosage
/mg·L-1
Soakingtime
/min
Growthspeedin2011/cm·d-1 Growthspeedin2012/cm·d-1
S1 S2 S3 S4 S1 S2 S3 S4

0 0.98cd 1.01e 2.53e 1.64f 0.86bc 1.29d 3.11de 1.93cd
10 1.03cd 1.08e 2.53e 1.67df 0.88bc 1.30cd 3.14d 1.94cd
20 0.96cd 0.98ef 2.51e 1.62f 0.85bc 1.25d 2.93e 1.92cd
30 0.95cd 0.98ef 2.51e 1.59fg 0.85bc 1.25d 2.92e 1.92cd
AV 0.98b 1.01bc 2.52c 1.63b 0.86c 1.27b 3.02c 1.93b
100
0 0.98cd 1.01e 2.53e 1.64f 0.86bc 1.29d 3.11d 1.93cd
10 1.23bc 1.24cd 2.61cd 1.91c 0.92b 1.33cd 3.24cd 1.98c
20 1.27b 1.29c 2.77c 2.06b 1.02ab 1.44ab 3.43c 2.00c
30 1.38a 1.51a 2.92bc 2.24a 1.15a 1.49a 3.82b 3.38a
AV 1.22a 1.26a 2.71ab 1.96a 0.98a 1.39a 3.40ab 2.32a
200
0 0.98cd 1.01e 2.53e 1.64f 0.86bc 1.29d 3.11d 1.93cd
10 1.30ab 1.37b 2.98b 2.08b 1.13a 1.46ab 3.46c 2.09bc
20 1.30ab 1.38b 3.09a 2.18a 1.13a 1.48a 4.28a 2.27b
30 1.17c 1.21d 3.03ab 1.76d 0.91b 1.32cd 3.22cd 1.97c
AV 1.19a 1.24a 2.91a 1.91a 1.01a 1.39a 3.52a 2.07ab
300
0 0.98cd 1.01e 2.53e 1.64f 0.86bc 1.29d 3.11d 1.93cd
10 1.25b 1.27c 2.64cd 2.00bc 1.01ab 1.38c 3.27cd 1.99c
20 1.13c 1.20d 2.54e 1.72d 0.89bc 1.31cd 3.16d 1.94cd
30 0.85e 0.95ef 2.43ef 1.26hi 0.79d 1.00ef 2.51f 1.82d
AV 1.05ab 1.11b 2.53c 1.66b 0.89c 1.25b 3.01c 1.92c
400
0 0.98cd 1.01e 2.53e 1.64f 0.86bc 1.29d 3.11d 1.93cd
10 0.94cd 0.98ef 2.49ef 1.49h 0.81cd 1.20e 2.90ef 1.89cd
20 0.93cd 0.97ef 2.47ef 1.46h 0.79d 1.20e 2.85ef 1.84d
30 0.65f 0.84g 2.42ef 1.18i 0.40e 0.77f 2.47f 1.80d
AV 0.88c 0.95c 2.48d 1.44c 0.72d 1.12c 2.83cd 1.86cd
Pvalues
NAA 0.0311 0.0433
Soakingduration(SD) 0.2454 0.2893
NAA×SD 0.0001 0.0001
  Note:Meanvalueisbasedonthreereplicateseachcharacteristic.Withinthesamecolumn,meansfolowedbythesamelettersarenotsignificantlydifer
entat犘≤0.05accordingtoLSDtests.S1:30~37daysafterplanting,S2:37~44daysafterplanting,S3:44~51daysafterplanting,S4:51~58daysaf
terplanting
194
! " # $ !23"
2.2 犈犳犳犲犮狋狊狅犳犖犃犃狅狀狆犾犪狀狋犺犲犻犵犺狋,狊狋犲犿犱犻犪犿犲狋犲狉
犪狀犱犪犫狅狏犲犵狉狅狌狀犱犫犻狅犿犪狊狊
Theplantheight,freshanddryaboveground
biomassoffirstharvestweresignificantlyaffected
bytheNAAdosagesandtheinteractionsofNAA
dosageandsoakingduration,butnotthesoaking
duration (Table2,3).Thetreatmentsof100
mg·L-1and200mg·L-1 NAAcausedasignifi
cantincreasein plant height,fresh and dry
abovegroundbiomasscomparedwiththecontrol,
whereasthetreatmentof400 mg· L-1 NAA
causedasignificantdecreaseintheseparameters.
Themaximumvaluesofplantheight,freshand
dryabovegroundbiomassoffirstharvestwereat
tainedinthecuttingstreatedwith200 mg·L-1
NAA,whichwere7.71%,11.02%and12.40%
higherthanthecontrolin2011,and4.92%,18.
37%,and16.68%higherthanthecontrolin2012,
respectively(Table2,3).Inthisstudy,theinter
actionbetweenNAAandsoakingdurationshowed
thattheplantheight,freshanddryabovegroundbi
omassoffirstharvestwerenotaffectedbysoaking
durationinthetreatmentofnonNAA.Itwasthe
maximumvaluesoftheseparameterswereobserved
inthetreatmentof100mg·L-1 NAAwith30min
soakingdurationandthetreatmentof200mg·L-1
NAA with20 minsoakingduration,respectively
(Table2,3).
Thestemdiameter,freshanddryaboveground
biomassofsecondharvestweresignificantlyaffected
bytheinteractionsofNAAdosageandsoakingdura
tion,butnotNAAdosagesandsoakingduration
(Table2,3).Thefreshanddryabovegroundbio
massofsecondharvestsignificantlyincreasedinthe
treatmentsof100mg·L-1,200mg·L-1and300
mg·L-1 NAA,whereassignificantlydecreasedin
thetreatmentof400mg·L-1NAAin2011(Table
2).Thehighestfreshanddryabovegroundbiomass
ofsecondharvestwereobservedinthecuttingstrea
tedwith200mg·L-1 NAA,whichwere8.52%
and8.76% higherthanthecontrols,respectively
(Table2).But,thefreshanddryabovegroundbio
massofsecondharvestsignificantlyincreasedonlyin
thetreatmentsof100mg·L-1and200mg·L-1
NAAin2012,andthehighestfreshand dry
abovegroundbiomassofsecondharvestwerealsoob
servedinthetreatmentof200mg·L-1NAA(Ta
ble3).Thefreshanddryabovegroundbiomassof
secondharvestwerenotaffectedbysoakingduration
inthetreatmentofnonNAA,however,themaxi
mumvaluesofbothwereachievedbytheinteractions
between100 mg·L-1 NAAand30 minsoaking
duration,200mg·L-1 NAAand20minsoaking
duration.
3 犇犻狊犮狌狊狊犻狅狀
ThisstudyhighlightedtheimportanceofNAA
dosageandsoakingdurationinthegrowthspeedand
maximizingabovegroundbiomassoflimpograsscut
ting.Thisstudyshowedthatthedailygrowthspeed
wasinfluencedbyNAAdosageforcuttingsobtained
in2011and2012.LowerdosageofNAAsignifi
cantlyincreasedthegrowthspeedoflimpograsscut
tingcomparedwiththecontrol,whilehigherdoses
ofNAAsignificantlydecreasedthegrowthspeedof
limpograsscutting,and200mg·L-1 wasfoundto
bethebestconcentrationofacceleratinggrowth.
ThisverifiedYan’s [7]reportthatauxincouldbe
comeinhibitorathigherconcentrations.Incontrary,
Padila犲狋犪犾.[8]reportedthatauxininducedroot
whenappliedtothebasalpartoftheshootsforboth
alongtermtreatmentandapulsetreatment,and
auxindidnothaveaclearpromotingeffectonshoot
growthinnormalconditions.Thismightresultfrom
differentmaterialsorsamplingperiods.Thedaily
growthspeedwasalsoaffectedbytheinteractionsof
NAAdosageandsoakingduration,andstemcut
tingstreatedwiththeNAAof200mg·L-1forthe
soakingdurationof20minproducedthemaximum
growthspeed.Shirol犲狋犪犾.[9]reportedthesimilar
resultsobtainedfromtheapplicationofNAAand
IBAin犈狌狆犺狅狉犫犻犪狆狌犾犮犺犲狉狉犻犿犪cuttings.
294
!3# W¦—:[û½犜犪犫犾犲2 犕狅狉狆犺狅犾狅犵犻犮犪犾犮犺犪狉犪犮狋犲狉犻狊狋犻犮狊犪狀犱犪犫狅狏犲犵狉狅狌狀犱犫犻狅犿犪狊狊狉犲狊狆狅狀狊犲狅犳犾犻犿狆狅犵狉犪狊狊犮狌狋狋犻狀犵狊狌狀犱犲狉
狋犺犲狋狉犲犪狋犿犲狀狋狊狅犳犖犃犃犱狅狊犪犵犲犪狀犱狊狅犪犽犻狀犵犱狌狉犪狋犻狅狀犻狀2011
NAAdosage
/mg·L-1
Soakingduration
/min
Plantheight
/cm
Stemdiameter
/mm
Firstharvest/t·hm-2
Secondharvest
/t·hm-2
FAB DAB FAB DAB

0 133.52defg 3.08bcd 11.99cd 8.84defg 28.61defg 21.10de
10 130.98efg 3.09bcd 12.12cd 8.91defg 29.80cde 21.91cd
20 129.61fg 3.05bcde 11.66de 8.78efg 27.88efgh 21.00de
30 128.61fg 3.04bcde 11.81cde 8.61fg 28.69def 20.92e
100
0 133.52defg 3.08bcd 11.99cd 8.84defg 28.61defg 21.10de
10 134.43cdef 3.13abc 12.38cd 9.20def 30.78bcd 22.88b
20 136.69cde 3.17ab 12.76bcd 9.27def 31.71abc 23.04b
30 139.94bc 3.24a 13.84ab 10.11abc 33.71a 24.62a
200
0 133.52defg 3.08bcd 11.99cd 8.84defg 28.61defg 21.10de
10 144.36ab 3.22a 13.98a 10.25ab 32.18ab 23.61b
20 146.78a 3.23a 13.99a 10.84a 31.79abc 24.63a
30 138.34cd 3.13abc 12.84bc 9.59bcd 30.80bcd 23.01b
400
0 133.52defg 3.08bcd 11.99cd 8.84defg 28.61defg 21.10de
10 128.41ef 3.02cde 10.83ef 8.30g 26.69fghi 20.46ef
20 121.92h 3.01cde 9.73fg 7.46h 26.45ghi 20.27ef
30 113.43i 2.94e 8.14h 6.31i 25.67i 19.88f
MeansforNAAdosage
0 130.68c  3.09a  11.89c 8.79c  28.75c  21.23c
100 136.15b 3.13a 12.74b 9.36b 30.84a 22.91a
200 140.75a 3.11a 13.20a 9.88a 31.20a 23.09a
300 129.79c 3.13a 11.47d 8.54c 29.90b 22.29b
400 124.32d 3.02a 10.17e 7.73d 26.85d 20.43d
Meansforsoakingduration
0 133.52a 3.09a 11.99b 8.84b 28.61c 21.10d
10 135.00a 3.13a 12.38a 9.23a 30.63a 22.85a
20 133.88a 3.11a 12.15ab 9.11a 29.78b 22.34b
30 126.94b 3.13a 11.06c 8.24c 29.01c 21.67c
  Note:Meanvalueisbasedonthreereplicateseachcharacteristic.Withinthesamecolumn,meansfolowedbythesamelettersarenotsig
nificantlydifferentat犘<0.05accordingtoLSDtests.FABFreshabovegroundbiomass,DABDryabovegroundbiomass
  Whenitcomestotheabovegroundbiomass,
thedatademonstratethatitispossibletoincrease
theabovegroundbiomassoflimpograssstemcut
tingbyoptimizingtheNAAdosageandsoaking
duration.OftheNAAdosagestested,lowerdos
ageofNAAcausedasignificantincreaseinplant
height,freshanddryabovegroundbiomassas
comparedwiththecontrol,butthetreatmentof
400mg·L-1NAAcausedasignificantdecreasein
theseparameters.Theseindicatedthattheincrea
sesofplantheight,freshanddryabovegroundbio
masswererelatedtothegrowthspeed,whichwas
consistentwiththeresultofHusenandPal[10].
Earlierstudiesshowedthatshootgenerationin
creasedwithlowerhormoneconcentrationandthe
responsedecreasedathigherconcentrationinother
crops[11].Contrarily,Hunt犲狋犪犾.[6]reportedthat
shootdryweightwasdecreasedsignificantlybyap
plyingNAAon犘犻狀狌狊犲犾犾犻狅狋狋犻犻cuttings.
TheNAAinducedpromotionintheplantheight
andabovegroundbiomassoflimpograsscuttingswere
inagreementwiththereportspublishedearlierregard
ingothercrops[12]andalga[4].Thelowerdosageof
NAAincreasingtherootingparametersoflimpograss
cuttingswasalsopreviousreported[13],and,theover
alpromotioninthegrowthoflimpograsscuttings
mightberelatedtothechangesofrooting.Itwassug
gestedthatNAAcouldserveasaphysiologicalyactive
formofauxincontributingtotheincreasesofrooting
andvegetativeproductioninlimpograss.Themethod
ofquicklydippingplantcuttingsintheveryhighdosa
gesofNAAwasoftenusedbyotherresearchers[10].
However,itwaspoorlyinvestigatedwhethersoaking
cuttingsforalongertimeatacertainauxindosagewas
394
! " # $ !23"
efectivefortheincreaseofabovegroundbiomass.
犜犪犫犾犲3 犕狅狉狆犺狅犾狅犵犻犮犪犾犮犺犪狉犪犮狋犲狉犻狊狋犻犮狊犪狀犱犪犫狅狏犲犵狉狅狌狀犱犫犻狅犿犪狊狊狉犲狊狆狅狀狊犲狅犳犾犻犿狆狅犵狉犪狊狊犮狌狋狋犻狀犵狊
狌狀犱犲狉狋犺犲狋狉犲犪狋犿犲狀狋狊狅犳犖犃犃犱狅狊犪犵犲犪狀犱狊狅犪犽犻狀犵犱狌狉犪狋犻狅狀犻狀2012
NAAdosage
/mg·L-1
Soakingduration
/min
Plantheight
/cm
Stemdiameter
/mm
Firstharvest/t·hm-2
Secondharvest
/t·hm-2
FAB DAB FAB DAB

0 107.37bc 3.23de 12.96fg 10.02fg 31.69f 24.63fgh
10 106.05bcd 3.24e 12.58gh 9.65g 32.73ef 25.12efg
20 105.23bcd 3.21e 12.33gh 9.33gh 32.32ef 24.46ghi
30 105.00bcd 3.18e 12.22hi 9.32gh 32.01ef 24.42ghi
100
0 107.37bc 3.23de 12.96fg 10.02fg 31.69f 24.63fgh
10 107.78bc 3.32c 13.63ef 10.26ef 34.10cde 25.66de
20 108.15bc 3.33bc 14.51d 10.63d 35.55bc 26.03bcd
30 111.07ab 3.39ab 15.25bc 11.56b 35.15cd 26.65bc
200
0 107.37bc 3.23de 12.96fg 10.02fg 31.69f 24.63fgh
10 111.22ab 3.35abc 15.52ab 11.62b 34.04cde 25.48def
20 115.80a 3.41a 16.08a 11.93a 38.30a 28.43a
30 110.08abc 3.31c 14.73cd 11.20c 35.19cd 26.77b
300
0 107.37bc 3.23de 12.96fg 10.02fg 31.69f 24.63fgh
10 108.48bc 3.33bc 14.11de 10.69d 37.52ab 28.44a
20 108.07bc 3.29cd 13.48ef 10.48de 33.24def 25.84cde
30 95.22e 3.11f 7.80k 6.06k 28.94g 22.50j
400
0 107.37bc 3.23de 12.96fg 10.02fg 31.69f 24.63fgh
10 103.48cd 3.18e 11.61i 8.70i 32.10ef 24.08hi
20 100.10de 3.18e 10.87j 8.11j 31.76f 23.71i
30 94.38e 3.10f 7.50k 5.77k 29.22g 22.48j
MeansforNAAdosage
0 105.91c 3.09a 12.52c 9.59c 32.19b 24.66d
100 108.59b 3.13a 14.09b 10.62b 34.12a 25.74b
200 111.12a 3.22a 14.82a 11.19a 34.81a 26.33a
300 104.79c 3.13a 12.09d 9.31d 32.85b 25.35c
400 101.33d 3.02a 10.73e 8.15e 31.19c 23.72e
Meansforsoakingduration
0 107.37a 3.09d 12.96b 10.03b 31.69b 24.63b
10 107.40a 3.13b 13.49a 10.18a 34.10a 25.75a
20 107.47a 3.41a 13.45a 10.09ab 34.24a 25.69a
30 103.15b 3.13c 11.50c 8.78c 32.10b 24.56b
  Note:Meanvalueisbasedonthreereplicateseachcharacteristic.Withinthesamecolumn,meansfolowedbythesamelettersarenotsig
nificantlydifferentat犘≤0.05accordingtoLSDtests.FABFreshabovegroundbiomass,DABDryabovegroundbiomass
  Findingsofthisinvestigationsuggestedthat
thesynergisticeffectsofNAAconcentrationand
soakingdurationontheplantheight,freshanddry
weightoftheabovegroundbiomassforthefirst
harvestweresignificant.Thecombinationof200
mg·L-1 NAAand20minsoakingdurationpro
ducedthemaximumplantheight,freshanddry
abovegroundbiomassofstemcuttings,whichhad
bettereffectthanthecombinationof100mg·L-1
and30minsoakingduration.Thesedataconfirmed
previousreports [14].Inthepresentstudy,the
treatmentsof100mg·L-1NAAwith30minsoa
kingdurationand200mg·L-1NAAwith20min
soakingdurationhadthehigherfreshanddry
abovegroundbiomassinthesecondharvest,which
wasconsistentwiththeresultsofthefirstharvest.
TheseindicatedthattheNAAinducedpromotion
intheabovegroundbiomassoflimpograsswasper
sistent.
4 犆狅狀犮犾狌狊犻狅狀
Theresultsfromthisresearchshowedthatthe
combinationofappropriateNAAdosagewithsoa
kingdurationisaviableapproachforenhancing
thebiomassproductivityoflimpograss.Thepre
494
!3# W¦—:[û½liminarystudiesdevelopedarangeofidealcombi
nationsofvariousNAAconcentrationsandsoaking
durationforacceleratingrootformationandroot
system development and improving the
abovegroundbiomassoflimpograssstemcutting.
However,morestudiesarerequiredtooptimize
thedosagesandcombinationsforenhancingthebi
omassofforagegrasses.Thistechnology,ifprov
eneffectiveatlargescale,wilhavewiderapplica
tionsforforagegrassproductioninthefuture.
犚犲犳犲狉犲狀犮犲狊
[1] HuangLK,ZhangXQ,XieWG,犲狋犪犾.Moleculardiversity
andpopulationstructureoftheforagegrass犎犲犿犪狉狋犺狉犻犪犮狅犿
狆狉犲狊狊犪(Poaceae)insouthChinabasedonSRAPmarkers[J].
GeneticsandMolecularResearch,2012,11(3):24412450
[2] HuangLK,ZhangXQ,ChengL,犲狋犪犾.Evaluationonthe
WaterloggingResistanceofWhipgrassGermplasmbySubordi
nateFunction[J].AdvancedScienceLetters,2012,7(4):328
331
[3] SelersBA,FerrelJA,HalerWT,犲狋犪犾.Phytotoxicityof
SelectedHerbicidesonLimpograss (犎犲犿犪狉狋犺狉犻犪犪犾狋犻狊狊犻犿犪)
[J].JournalofAquaticPlantManagement,2007,45:5457
[4] HuntRW,ChinnasamyS,DasKC.TheEffectofNaphtha
leneAceticAcidonBiomassProductivityandChlorophylCon
tentofGreenAlgae,Coccolithophore,Diatom,andCyanobac
terium Cultures[J].Applied Biochemisty Biotechnology,
2011,164(8):13501365
[5] SunYL,HongSK.EffectsofplantgrowthregulatorsandL
glutamicacidonshootorganogenesisinthehalophyte犔犲狔犿狌狊
犮犺犻狀犲狀狊犻狊(Trin.)[J].PlantCel TissOrganCult,2010,100
(3):317328
[6] HuntRW,ChinnasamyS,BhatnagarA,犲狋犪犾.EffectofBio
chemicalStimulantsonBiomassProductivityand Metabolite
ContentoftheMicroalga,犆犺犾狅狉犲犾犾犪狊狅狉狅犽犻狀犻犪狀犪[J].Applied
BiochemistyBiotechnology,2010,162(8):24002414
[7] YanYH,LiJL,ZhangXQ,犲狋犪犾.Effectofnaphthalene
aceticacidonadventitiousrootdevelopmentandassociated
physiologicalchangesinstemcuttingof犎犲犿犪狉狋犺狉犻犪犮狅犿狆狉犲狊狊犪
[J].PLoSOne,2014,9(3):e90700
[8] PadilaIMG,VidoyI,EncinaCL.Influenceofindolebutyr
icacidandelectropulseoninvitrorootinganddevelopmentof
olive(犗犾犲犪犲狌狉狅狆犲犪L.)microshoots[J].PlantCelReports,
2009,28(9):14111420
[9] ShirolAM,PatiAA,NalwadiUG.Biochemicalbasisof犈狌
狆犺狅狉犫犻犪狆狌犾犮犺犲狉狉犻犿犪 Wildvar.AlbaHortrootingthrough
cuttings[J].SouthIndianHort,1992,40(5):15965
[10]HusenA,PalM.Effectofbranchpositionandauxintreat
mentonclonalpropagationof犜犲犮狋狅狀犪犵狉犪狀犱犻狊Linn.[J].New
Forests,2007,34(3):223233
[11]AgampodiVA,JayawardenaB.Effectofcoconut(犆狅犮狅狊狀狌
犮犻犳犲狉犪L.)waterextractsonadventitiousrootdevelopmentin
vegetativepropagationof犇狉犪犮犪犲狀犪狆狌狉狆犾犲犮狅犿狆犪犮狋犪 L.[J].
ActaPhysiologiaePlantarum,2009,31(2):279284
[12]KaurS,CheemaSS,ChhabraBR,犲狋犪犾.Chemicalinduction
ofphysiologicalchangesduringadventitiousrootformationand
budbreakingrapevinecuttings[J].PlantGrowthRegulation,
2002,37(1):6368
[13]YanYH,ZhangXQ,GongY,犲狋犪犾.Influenceofdifferent
dosagesofnaphthaleneaceticacid(NAA)andsoakingtimeon
stemcuttingsof犎犲犿犪狉狋犺狉犻犪犮狅犿狆狉犲狊狊犪[J].Researchon
Crops,2013,14(3):907914
[14]RajuNL,PrasadM NV.Influenceofgrowthhormoneson
adventitiousrootformationin semihardwood cuttings of
犆犲犾犪狊狋狌狉狊狆犪狀犻犮狌犾犪狋狌狊Wild.:acontributionforrapidmulti
plicationandconservationmanagement[J].AgroforestySys
tems,2010,79(2):24952

%&( )*+)
594