Factor Analysis of Allelochemicals in Rhizosphere Soil of Flue-cured Tobacco and its Comprehensive Effect on Tobacco Economical Characteristics
-
摘要:
目的 通过分析烤烟根际土壤化感物质之间相互关系及与烤烟经济性状相关关系,为消减连作障碍配套研究提供理论参考。 方法 以云南省红河州泸西连作烤烟为供试材料,利用GC-MS检测根际化感物质,通过因子分析和典型相关分析,提取能够解释大部分变量的公因子,分析根际化感物质与烤烟经济性状的相关关系。 结果 烤烟根际检测并确定出13种根际土壤化感物质,因子分析提取3个公因子,第一因子为酚酸类物质,占有变量总方差的53.75%,对十四酸、莨菪亭、十七碳酸、亚麻酸具有高的正载荷,具有相似的变化趋势,相互之间呈正相关。第二因子为酸-酯-酰胺类因子,占变量总方差的19.27%,苯甲酸、香草醛、软脂酸、芥酸酰胺具有高的正载荷。第三因子为酚酯类因子,占变量总方差的11.78%,2,2′-亚甲基双-(6-叔丁基对甲苯酚)、邻苯二甲酸二辛酯具有高正载荷。简单相关和典型相关分析表明,根际化感物质不是单因子影响烤烟经济性状,是多因子综合影响,以第一因子为主要影响因素,具体表现为烤烟根际土壤十四酸、莨菪亭、十七碳酸和亚麻酸与单叶重和产值呈正相关,但与中上等烟叶比例呈负相关。 结论 烤烟根际化感物质对烟叶的影响是双向的,但增加单叶重和亩产值的正效应大于降低中上等烟叶单叶重的负效应。 Abstract:Objective The study analyzed the correlation between the rhizosphere allelochemicals and tobacco economic characteristics and would provide a reference for decreasing the probolem caused by continuous cropping. Method Continuous cropping tobacco from Yunnan Honghe Luxi were used as materials and allelochemicals were detected by GC-MS. Result The results showed that 13 kinds of rhizosphere allelopathy substances were detected in rhizosphere soil of flue-cured tobacco. Three common factors were extracted by factor analysis. The first factor was phenolic acid factor, accounting for 53.752% of the total variance of variables. Myristic acid, belladonna pavilion, margaric acid and linolenic acid positively correlated with each other with high load. The second factor was acid-ester amide factor, accounting for 19.272% of the total variance of the variable. Benzoic acid, vanillin, palmitic acid, erucic acid amide had high positive loads. The third factor was phenolic ester factor, accounting for 11.778% of the total variance of variables. 2,2′-methylene bis -(6-tert-butylp-methylphenol) and dioctyl phthalate had high positive load. The results of simple correlation and canonical correlation showed that the effect of rhizosphere allelochemicals on tobacco economical characters was comprehensive and the first common factor was the main indicator. It behaved that myristic acid, belladonna pavilion, margaric acid and linolenic acid positively correlated with tobacco output value, while they negatively correlated with ration of middle-high grade leaves and weight per leaf class. Conclusion Rhizosphere allelochemicals of tobacco had a bidirectional effect on tobacco. While the positive effects of increasing single leaf weight and output value were higher than decreasing ratio of middle-up class leaves. So it would provide a new thought and method for decreasing continuous cropping obstacle about how to make use of rhizosphere allelochemicals. -
Key words:
- Allelochemicals /
- Tobacco yield /
- Rhizosphere soil /
- Factor analysis /
- Canonical correlation analysis
-
表 1 烤烟根际土壤化感物质自相关相关系数
Table 1. Autocorrelation coefficient of allelochemicals in flue-cured tobacco rhizosphere soil
苯甲酸
Benzoic
acid香草醛
Vanillin十四酸
Myristic
acid莨菪亭
Scopoletin软酯酸
Palmitic
acid十七碳酸
Heptadecanoic
acid亚油酸
Linoleic
acid亚麻酸
Linolenic
acid硬酯酸
Stearic
acid花生酸
Arachidic
acid2,2′-亚甲基双-
(6-叔丁基对甲苯酚)
2,2′-methylene bis -
(6-tert-butylp-methylphenol)邻苯二甲酸
二辛酯
Dioctyl
phthalate芥酸酰胺
Erucyl
amide苯甲酸 1 香草醛 0.493 1 十四酸 0.608* 0.122 1 莨菪亭 0.577 0.232 0.829** 1 软酯酸 0.948** 0.487 0.603* 0.680* 1 十七碳酸 0.541 0 0.873** 0.865** 0.597 1 亚油酸 0.726** 0.401 0.634* 0.738** 0.81** 0.579 1 亚麻酸 0.683* 0.227 0.822*** 0.891** 0.741** 0.858** 0.592 1 硬酯酸 0.897** 0.358 0.672* 0.775** 0.938** 0.680* 0.869** 0.779** 1 花生酸 0.204 −0.16 0.53 0.63* 0.312 0.657* 0.53 0.544 0.391 1 2,2′-亚甲基双-
(6-叔丁基对甲苯酚)−0.006 0.192 −0.121 −0.333 −0.034 −0.204 −0.225 −0.321 −0.166 −0.693* 1 邻苯二甲酸二辛酯 0.184 0.444 0.262 0.082 0.208 0.156 0.131 0.014 0.073 −0.259 0.816** 1 芥酸酰胺 0.575 0.395 0.336 0.314 0.536 0.093 0.536 0.336 0.504 0.361 −0.365 −0.074 1 注:*表示相关性达到显著水平(P < 0.05);**表示相关性达到极显著水平(P < 0.01)。 表 2 提取因子特征值、方差贡献率、累计贡献率
Table 2. Eigenvalue, variance contribution rate and cumulative contribution rate of extract factor
成分
Factor因子特征值
Factor eigenvalue提取载荷平方和
Extract the sum of squares of loads旋转载荷平方和
Sum of squares of rotational loads总计
Sum方差贡献率(%)
Relative variance
contribution累计贡献率(%)
Cumulative variance
contribution总计
Sum方差贡献率(%)
Relative variance
contribution累计贡献率(%)
Cumulative variance
contribution总计
Sum1 6.99 53.75 53.75 6.99 53.75 53.75 6.30 2 2.51 19.27 73.02 2.51 19.27 73.02 5.14 3 1.53 11.78 84.80 1.53 11.78 84.80 2.49 4 0.66 5.10 89.90 5 0.49 3.82 93.72 6 0.41 3.14 96.86 7 0.20 1.57 98.43 8 0.12 0.89 99.30 9 0.04 0.34 99.66 10 0.03 0.23 99.89 11 0.01 0.05 99.94 12 0.01 0.05 99.98 13 0.01 0.01 100.00 表 3 3个公因子载荷矩阵
Table 3. Load matrix for three factors
指标
Index1 2 3 苯甲酸 0.486 0.786 0.110 香草醛 −0.052 0.749 0.355 十四酸 0.894 0.216 0.065 莨菪亭 0.886 0.300 −0.117 软酯酸 0.565 0.761 0.093 十七碳酸 0.984 0.047 −0.007 亚油酸 0.586 0.657 −0.092 亚麻酸 0.854 0.334 −0.116 硬酯酸 0.658 0.676 −0.034 花生酸 0.650 0.037 −0.592 2,2′-亚甲基双-(6-叔丁基对甲苯酚) −0.189 −0.063 0.957 邻苯二甲酸二辛酯 0.164 0.121 0.897 芥酸酰胺 0.069 0.788 −0.349 表 4 3个公因子得分系数矩阵
Table 4. Factor scores for three factors
指标
Index1 2 3 苯甲酸 0.042 0.217 0.047 香草醛 −0.077 0.261 0.129 十四酸 0.194 −0.027 0.062 莨菪亭 0.180 0.007 −0.019 软酯酸 0.063 0.200 0.044 十七碳酸 0.231 −0.094 0.040 亚油酸 0.074 0.165 −0.032 亚麻酸 0.169 0.022 −0.020 硬酯酸 0.091 0.162 −0.004 花生酸 0.138 −0.049 −0.226 2,2′-亚甲基双-(6-叔丁基对甲苯酚) −0.016 −0.019 0.404 邻苯二甲酸二辛酯 0.049 0.007 0.389 芥酸酰胺 −0.069 0.274 −0.169 表 5 烤烟根际化感物质与烤烟产值量简单相关系数
Table 5. Correlation coefficient between soil allelochemicals in the rhizosphere of flue-cured tobacco and tobacco yield
指标
Index中上等烟比例
The proportion of better than average tobacco产量
Yield单叶重
Weight of single leaf产值
The output value苯甲酸 −0.540 −0.570 −0.705 −0.552 香草醛 −0.446 −0.644 −0.529 −0.680 十四酸 −0.653 −0.647 −0.630 −0.587 莨菪亭 0.542 0.446 0.222 0.446 软酯酸 −0.394 −0.355 −0.522 −0.325 十七碳酸 −0.419 −0.465 −0.681 −0.448 亚油酸 −0.274 −0.214 −0.404 −0.167 亚麻酸 −0.307 −0.394 −0.421 −0.392 硬酯酸 −0.487 −0.417 −0.650 −0.387 花生酸 −0.452 −0.414 −0.588 −0.408 2,2'-亚甲基双-(6-叔丁基对甲苯酚) 0.685 0.421 0.470 0.485 邻苯二甲酸二辛酯 −0.327 −0.373 −0.384 −0.337 芥酸酰胺 −0.335 −0.540 −0.426 −0.489 苯甲酸 −0.326 −0.544 −0.353 −0.504 表 6 烤烟根际土壤化感物质公因子与烤烟产值量典型相关系数
Table 6. Canonical correlation coefficient between soil allelochemicals in the rhizosphere of flue-cured tobacco and tobacco yield
相关性
Correlation特征值
Eigenvalue威尔克统计
Welk statisticsF 分子自由度
Numerator degrees of freedom分母自由度
Denominator Degrees of FreedomP 第1典型相关系数 0.908 4.716 0.051 3.616 15.000 28.007 0.002 第2典型相关系数 0.802 1.801 0.292 2.339 8.000 22.000 0.055 第3典型相关系数 0.427 0.223 0.818 0.890 3.000 12.000 0.474 表 7 第1集合标准化相关系数
Table 7. Standardized correlation coefficients for first combine
变量
Variable变量
VariableF1 0.977 y1 1.862 F2 0.094 y2 −36.079 F3 −0.193 y3 0.565 / / y4 −23.46 y5 56.293 -
[1] 谢星光, 陈 晏, 卜元卿, 等. 酚酸类物质的化感作用研究进展[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34(22): 6417 − 6428. [2] 李庆凯. 化感物质对花生根际微生物生态环境及产量的影响[D]. 青岛: 青岛农业大学, 2016. [3] Rice E L. Allelopathy[M]. New York: Academic Press Inc, 1974. [4] 张学文, 刘亦学, 刘万学, 等. 植物化感物质及其释放途径[J]. 中国农学通报, 2007, 23(7): 295 − 297. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6850.2007.07.068 [5] 李彦鹏, 郭红霞, 代丹丹, 等. 根系分泌物中的化感物质研究概述[J]. 河南农业科学, 2009, 9: 94 − 98. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-3268.2009.10.028 [6] 吴玉光, 肖 强. 蔬菜连作障碍的防控技术[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2010, 7: 23 − 25. [7] 侯 慧, 董 坤, 杨智仙, 等. 连作障碍发生机理研究进展[J]. 土壤, 2016, 48(6): 1068 − 1076. [8] 陈 玲, 董 坤, 杨智仙, 等. 连作障碍中化感自毒效应及间作缓解机理[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017, 33(8): 91 − 98. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb16050045 [9] Asaadawi I S, AI-Uqaili J K, Alrubeaa A J, et a1. Allelopathic suppression of weed and nitrification by selected cultivars of Sorghum bicolor(L. ) moench[J]. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 1986, 12(1): 209 − 219. doi: 10.1007/BF01045604 [10] Dilday R H, Lin J, Yan W. Identification of allelopathy in the USDA-ARS rice germplasm collection[J]. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 1994, 34(7): 907 − 910. doi: 10.1071/EA9940907 [11] AI Hamdi B, Inderjit, Olofsdotter M, et a1. Lahoratory bioassay for phytotoxicity: An example from wheat straw[J]. Agronomy Journal, 2001, 93(1): 43 − 48. [12] 阎 飞, 韩丽梅, 孙 衍, 等. 大豆连作土壤中化感物质浸提剂的生物筛选[J]. 吉林农业科学, 2000, 25(1): 8 − 12. [13] 柴 强, 冯福学. 玉米根系分泌物的分离鉴定及典型分泌物的化感效应[J]. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2007, 42(5): 43 − 48. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4315.2007.05.010 [14] 蒋潘强. 不同连作年限对植烟土壤养分的影响研究初探[J]. 今日湖北(下旬刊), 2015, 10: 92 − 93. [15] 孙敬国, 王昌军, 孙光伟, 等. 连作年限对植烟根际土壤化感物质积累的影响-以湖北黄棕壤烟田为例[J]. 土壤, 2021, 53(1): 148 − 153. [16] 韩丽梅, 沈其荣, 王树起, 等. 大豆根茬木霉腐解产物的鉴定及其化感作用的研究[J]. 应用生态学报, 2002, 13(10): 1295 − 1299. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-9332.2002.10.021 [17] 刘爱国. 化感品种水稻次生代谢物质的研究[D]. 天津: 南开大学, 2007. [18] 高 强. 甜瓜化感作物生理生化机制及主要化感物质的鉴定[D]. 福州: 福建农林大学, 2014. [19] 于会泳, 申国明, 高欣欣. 烟草根系分泌物的GC-MS检测[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2013, 19(4): 64 − 72. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-5708.2013.04.011 [20] Gao L, Guo P. Research progress on the inhibitory effects of phenolic acid allelochemicals on algae[J]. Technology of Water Treatment, 2012, 38(9): 1 − 4. [21] Leather G, Einhelliqfa. Bioassay of naturally occurring allelchemicals for phytoxicity[J]. Chemical ecology, 1988, 14(10): 1821 − 1828. doi: 10.1007/BF01013479 [22] 杨敬国, 张 丽, 姬厚伟, 等. 影响烟草次生代谢产物因素的研究进展[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2014, 42(28): 9678 − 9681. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0517-6611.2014.28.008 [23] Lambers H, Chapin F S, Pons T L. Plant physiological ecology[M]. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1998: 413-415. [24] 高于勤, 张淑香. 连作障碍与根际微生态研究根系分秘物及其生态效应[J]. 应用生态学报, 1998, 9(5): 549 − 554. [25] Oleszek W, Jurzysta M. The allelopathic potential of alfalfa root medicagenic acid glycosides and their fate in soil environments[J]. Plant and Soil, 1987, 98: 67 − 80. doi: 10.1007/BF02381728 [26] 周宝利, 韩 琳, 尹玉玲, 等. 化感物质棕榈酸对茄子根际土壤微生物组成及微生物量的影响[J]. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2010, 41(3): 275 − 278. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1700.2010.03.004 [27] 张新慧, 张恩和, 何庆祥, 等. 2, 4-二叔丁基苯酚对啤酒花幼苗生长与光合特性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2008, 17(6): 47 − 51. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1004-5759.2008.06.007