| Literature DB >> 33805780 |
Xuhong Zhao1,2, Lifang Kang1, Qian Wang1,2,3, Cong Lin1, Wei Liu1,4, Wenli Chen4, Tao Sang1,2,4, Juan Yan5.
Abstract
As a potential energy crop with high biomass yield, Miscanthus lutarioriparius (M. lutarioriparius), endemic to the Long River Range in central China, needs to be investigated for its acclimation to stressful climatic and soil conditions often found on the marginal land. In this study, traits related to acclimation and yield, including survival rates, plant height (PH), stem diameter (SD), tiller number (TN), water use efficiency (WUE), and photosynthetic rates (A), were examined for 41 M. lutarioriparius populations that transplanted to the arid and cold Loess Plateau of China. The results showed that the average survival rate of M. lutarioriparius populations was only 4.16% over the first winter but the overwinter rate increased to 35.03% after the second winter, suggesting that plants having survived the first winter could have acclaimed to the low temperature. The strikingly high survival rates over the second winter were found to be 95.83% and 80.85%, respectively, for HG18 and HG39 populations. These populations might be especially valuable for the selection of energy crops for such an area. Those individuals surviving for the two consecutive winters showed significantly higher WUE than those measured after the first winter. The high WUE and low stomatal conductance (gs) observed in survived individuals could have been responsible for their acclimation to this new and harsh environment. A total of 61 individuals with productive growth traits and strong resistance to cold and drought were identified for further energy crop development. This study showed that the variation of M. lutarioriparius held great potential for developing energy crops following continuous field selection.Entities:
Keywords: Miscanthus lutarioriparius; biomass yield; photosynthetic rate; survival rate; water use efficiency
Year: 2021 PMID: 33805780 PMCID: PMC8001145 DOI: 10.3390/plants10030544
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1The variation in the survival rate of Miscanthus lutarioriparius populations in two growing seasons. The black bars represent the survival rates of populations in the 2012 growing season and the grey bars represent the survival rates of populations in the 2013 growing season, all based on the total number of plants grown in 2011.
Figure 2Overwintering rate of 41 M. lutarioriparius populations based on surviving individuals in 2012 and 2013.
Figure 3The differences in growth traits, photosynthetic parameters, and water use efficiency of the two groups in 2012. The white bars represented 164 individuals that survived in both 2012 and 2013 and the black bars represented 470 individuals that died in 2013. Mean values and ±SE (error bars) were calculated, respectively, within surviving individuals in 2012. Different lowercases present a significant difference at p < 0.05 level (a, b) and capital letters present a significant difference at p < 0.01 level (A, B). A: photosynthetic rate; E: transpiration rate; gs: stomatal conductance; Ci: intercellular CO2 concentration; WUEe: extrinsic water use efficiency; WUEi: intrinsic water use efficiency.
Figure 4The changes in growth traits, photosynthetic parameters, and water use efficiency when 155 M. lutarioriparius individuals acclimated to the harsh environments from 2012 to 2013. The white bars represent the 2012 growing season (2012) and the black bars represent the 2013 growing season (2013). Mean values and ±SE (error bars) were calculated within 155 surviving individuals. Different lowercases present a significant difference at p < 0.05 level (a, b) and different capital letters present a significant difference at p < 0.01 level (A, B). A: photosynthetic rate; E: transpiration rate; gs: stomatal conductance; C: intercellular CO2 concentration; WUEe: extrinsic water use efficiency; WUEi: intrinsic water use efficiency.
Two-way ANOVA on growth traits and photosynthetic parameters of 155 M. lutarioriparius individuals in the arid Huanxian of the Gansu (HG). Year: growing seasons; Pop: populations. PH: plant height; SD: stem diameter; TN: tiller number; A: photosynthetic rate; E: transpiration rate; gs: stomatal conductance; Ci: intercellular CO2 concentration; WUEe: extrinsic water use efficiency; WUEi: intrinsic water use efficiency. MS: Mean square
| Traits | Source of Variation | df | MS |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PH | Year | 1 | 1912 | 1.19 | 0.28 |
| Pop | 22 | 24,766 | 15.37 | <0.001 | |
| Year × Pop | 22 | 1862 | 1.16 | 0.29 | |
| SD | Year | 1 | 9.01 | 2.77 | 0.1 |
| Pop | 22 | 28.99 | 8.92 | <0.001 | |
| Year × Pop | 22 | 6.55 | 2.01 | 0.01 | |
| TN | Year | 1 | 24,591 | 261.13 | <0.001 |
| Pop | 22 | 324 | 3.42 | <0.001 | |
| Year × Pop | 22 | 164 | 1.74 | 0.02 | |
| A | Year | 1 | 278.1 | 11.89 | 0.001 |
| Pop | 22 | 74.88 | 3.2 | <0.001 | |
| Year × Pop | 22 | 56.23 | 2.4 | 0.001 | |
| gs | Year | 1 | 0.02 | 4.48 | 0.035 |
| Pop | 22 | 0.01 | 1.88 | 0.011 | |
| Year × Pop | 22 | 0.01 | 1.54 | 0.06 | |
| Ci | Year | 1 | 79,849.47 | 64.85 | <0.001 |
| Pop | 22 | 2722.37 | 2.21 | 0.002 | |
| Year × Pop | 22 | 1671.63 | 1.36 | 0.135 | |
| E | Year | 1 | 199.27 | 280.58 | <0.001 |
| Pop | 22 | 5.83 | 8.21 | <0.001 | |
| Year × Pop | 22 | 5.38 | 7.57 | <0.001 | |
| WUEe | Year | 1 | 833.34 | 562.32 | <0.001 |
| Pop | 22 | 26.33 | 17.77 | <0.001 | |
| Year × Pop | 22 | 23.15 | 15.62 | <0.001 | |
| WUEi | Year | 1 | 32,015.11 | 55.42 | <0.001 |
| Pop | 22 | 956.74 | 1.66 | 0.035 | |
| Year × Pop | 22 | 1053.36 | 1.82 | 0.015 |
The correlation analysis between growth traits and photosynthetic parameters based on the 2013 growing season. ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05. PH: plant height; SD: stem diameter; TN: tiller number; A: photosynthetic rate; E: transpiration rate; gs: stomatal conductance; Ci: intercellular CO2 concentration; WUEe: extrinsic water use efficiency; WUEi: intrinsic water use efficiency.
| Traits | PH | SD | TN | A | gs | Ci | E | WUEe |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SD | 0.74 ** | |||||||
| TN | 0.11 | 0.01 | ||||||
| A | 0.29 ** | 0.23 ** | 0.24 ** | |||||
| gs | 0.15 ** | 0.13 * | −0.01 | 0.80 ** | ||||
| Ci | −0.20 ** | −0.12 * | −0.30 ** | 0.19 ** | 0.69 ** | |||
| E | 0.09 | −0.07 | 0.49 ** | 0.52 ** | 0.39 ** | 0.05 | ||
| WUEe | 0.14 * | 0.24 ** | −0.44 ** | −0.06 | −0.02 | 0.03 | −0.80 ** | |
| WUEi | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.26 ** | −0.35 ** | −0.80 ** | −0.97 ** | −0.14 * | −0.01 |
Figure 5Cluster analysis of 155 individuals survived in both 2012 and 2013. The tree structure on the left presents the 5 groups of individuals and the colored squares on the right present the standardized data of growth traits, photosynthetic parameters, and WUE. The changes in the color in a square from green to red represent the value change of growth traits, photosynthetic parameters, and WUE from low to high.
Figure 6The locations of M. lutarioriparius in native habitats and domestication sites in the HG. The black square represents the experimental field in this study; the red dots represent the collection locations of 41 M. lutarioriparius populations.