-
藤椒为芸香科花椒属多年生常绿灌木植物,属于竹叶花椒(Zanthoxylum armatum DC.)中的一个栽培品种,因其叶片狭长,状如竹叶而得名,由于其枝叶披散、延长状若藤蔓,故又名“藤椒”[1-2]。藤椒具有果实颗粒大、油胞突出、香味浓郁、出油率高等特点,是集香料、调料、油料等为一体的特色经济林树种。四川是藤椒的重要产区,栽培较为广泛,眉山、乐山、绵阳、雅安、成都等地均有分布。藤椒产业现已成为我省山区农村经济新的增长点和助农增收、脱贫攻坚的突破口[3]。
花椒属植物大多主干、枝条和叶片均密生皮刺,而皮刺的特殊性决定了其采摘收获的难度。此外,花椒的呈香呈麻风味物质大多分布于表皮突起的薄壁油胞中,操作不当便会引起花椒果皮变暗、麻香味挥发、品质降低。尽管国内在花椒采摘机[4-7]研究方面取得了一定进展,但产品技术不过关、性能不稳定,在生产应用中还不成熟。目前花椒采摘主要依靠人工,劳动强度大、效率低,劳动力日益短缺和机械采摘技术的不成熟,造成花椒生产成本高,尤其是采摘成本高,种植效益相对降低,成为阻碍花椒产业发展的瓶颈因素,影响了椒农发展花椒的积极性。因此,开展藤椒品种遗传改良,培育少刺或无刺品种,是解决果实采收困难的主要途径之一。
刺是植物本身在长期进化过程中适应外界环境的一种表现,它可以在茎、叶、花和果上发生,按其来源可分为皮刺、枝刺和叶刺等,而皮刺是茎枝、叶片上的表皮或皮层形成的尖锐突起[8-9]。花椒的皮刺结构相对简单,无维管束,其组织细胞形态与茎表皮相近[10]。近年来,先后有陕西大红袍[11]、陇南大红袍[12-13]、荣昌无刺花椒[14]、汉源无刺花椒[15]、汉源葡萄青椒[16]等乡土本地少刺或无刺花椒新品种的报道,而对于藤椒少刺或无刺的研究较少。为进一步探索藤椒皮刺退化或减少的现象,本研究将开展藤椒少刺优良无性系皮刺性状及结实特性的对比分析,揭示藤椒枝刺、叶刺及结实特性,为创新藤椒育种材料提供科学依据。
-
据调查,不同无性系枝条皮刺性状差异较大(见表1)。藤椒少刺无性系‘丹林1号’当年抽发新梢基部直径最大,达2.17 cm,与对照CK呈差异显著(P<0.05),‘丹林2号’次之,为1.79 cm,与对照CK差异不显著。‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’枝条皮刺数、皮刺宽、皮刺长宽比均与对照CK呈差异显著(P<0.05),两者之间呈差异不显著;‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’枝条皮刺数分别为21.13个、22.53个,比CK分别减少72.72%、70.91%;皮刺宽分别为0.70 cm、0.63 cm,比CK分别减少45.31%、50.78%。‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’与对照CK皮刺长、皮刺间距均呈差异显著(P<0.05),且两者之间呈差异显著;皮刺长分别为1.22、1.01,比CK分别减少34.76%、45.99%;刺间距分别为8.32 cm、5.96 cm,比CK分别增加81.14%、37.96%。由此可见,‘丹林1号’新梢生长量最大,皮刺数大幅减少,且刺间距增大,‘丹林2号’新梢生长量较‘丹林1号’小,皮刺数大幅减少,皮刺相对短而窄。
表 1 藤椒少刺无性系枝条皮刺性状对比
Table 1. Comparison of prickle characteristics on branches of Zanthoxylum armatum DC. clones with fewer prickles
无性系
Clone枝条基部直径/cm
Diameter at the
branch base/cm皮刺数/个
Prickle
number/individual皮刺宽/cm
Prickle
width/cm皮刺长/cm
Prickle
length/cm皮刺长宽比
Prickle length-width
ratio皮刺间距/cm
Prickle
distance/cm丹林1号 2.17±0.34 a 21.13±8.06 b 0.70±0.15 b 1.22±0.22 b 1.76±0.22 a 8.32±2.55 a 丹林2号 1.79±0.44 b 22.53±6.68 b 0.63±0.19 b 1.01±0.20 c 1.77±0.65 a 5.96±2.62 b CK 1.64±0.39 b 77.46±6.06 a 1.28±0.14 a 1.87±0.14 a 1.48±0.19 b 4.32±0.67 c 平均差异在0.05水平上显著。下同
The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. -
由表2可知,藤椒少刺无性系‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’复叶小叶数以3片居多,而CK以5片居多,但三者复叶长则不显著;‘丹林2号’小叶长和小叶宽均为最大,达7.20 cm和3.74 cm,分别高于对照CK的1.20 cm和1.0 cm;‘丹林1号’次之,分别为6.60 cm和3.24 cm。‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’叶片及叶轴均无刺,而对照CK则有细小叶刺。总体来看,藤椒少刺无性系‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’复叶小叶数减少,但小叶长和宽均有所增大,且叶片均无皮刺。
表 2 藤椒少刺无性系叶片皮刺性状对比
Table 2. Comparison of prickle characteristics on leaves of Zanthoxylum armatum DC. clones with fewer prickles
无性系
Clone小叶数/片
Lobular
number/piece复叶长/cm
Length of
compound leaves/cm小叶长/cm
Lobular length/cm小叶宽/cm
Lobular width/cm叶轴刺数/个
Prickle number
of rachis/
individual叶轴刺长/cm
Prickle
length of
rachis /cm叶轴刺间距/cm
Prickle distance
of rachis/cm叶片刺数/个
Prickle number
of leaf /ind vidual叶片刺长/cm
Prickle length
of leaf/cm丹林1号 3.27±0.69 b 13.00±2.20 a 6.60±1.19 ab 3.24±0.63 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 丹林2号 3.00 c 13.54±2.20 a 7.20±1.50 a 3.74±0.60 a 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b CK 5.00 a 13.65±1.52 a 6.00±0.87 b 2.74±0.36 c 4.97±1.32 a 0.37±0.14 a 2.50±0.42 a 9.13±4.15 a 0.15±0.03 a -
由表3可知,‘丹林1号’果序基径最粗,达0.58 cm,与‘丹林2号’和CK呈差异显著(P<0.05),而‘丹林2号’和CK之间差异不显著,果序基径在0.39 cm~0.42 cm之间。‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’与CK之间果穗长和果穗宽呈差异显著,其中‘丹林2号’果穗长和果穗宽最大,分别为12.54 cm、7.87 cm,‘丹林1号’次之,分别为11.05 cm、7.14 cm。‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’果穗(果柄)无刺,平均果粒数为98~101粒之间,与CK呈差异显著。
表 3 藤椒少刺无性系结实特性对比
Table 3. Comparison of fruiting characteristics of Zanthoxylum armatum DC. clones with fewer prickles
无性系
Clone果序基径/cm
Diameter at the
cluster base/cm果穗长/cm
Ear length/cm果穗宽/cm
Ear width/cm果穗长宽比
Ear length-width
ratio果粒数/个
Fruits number/
individual果穗皮刺长/cm
Prickle length
of cluster/cm果穗皮刺宽/cm
Prickle length
of cluster/cm果形指数
Fruit shape index丹林1号 0.58±0.10 a 11.05±2.17 b 7.14±1.48 b 1.59±0.37 a 98.33±25.71 a 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 1.21±0.10 a 丹林2号 0.42±0.09 b 12.54±2.15 a 7.87±1.68 a 1.64±0.32 a 100.90±31.69 a 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 1.22±0.11 a CK 0.39±0.03 b 7.34±1.37 c 4.90±0.58 c 1.52±0.33 a 75.73±9.89 b 0.40±0.77 a 0.15±0.28 a 1.17±0.07 a
Comparative Analysis on Prickles and Fruiting Characteristics of Superior Clones with Fewer Prickles in Zanthoxylum armatum DC.
More Information-
摘要: 本研究以选育的藤椒少刺优良无性系‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’为试材,系统对比了枝刺、叶刺及结实特性。结果表明:(1)‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’皮刺数、皮刺宽、皮刺长宽比均与对照CK差异显著,两者之间差异不显著,枝条皮刺数分别比CK减少72.72%、70.91%;‘丹林1号’、‘丹林2号’和CK皮刺长、皮刺间距三者之间差异显著,刺间距分别比CK增加81.14%、37.96%。(2)‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’复叶小叶数以3片居多,叶片及叶轴均无刺,CK复叶小叶以5片为主,具细小叶刺。(3)‘丹林1号’、‘丹林2号’和CK之间果穗长和果穗宽差异显著,其中‘丹林2号’果穗长和果穗宽最大,分别为12.54 cm、7.87 cm;‘丹林1号’和‘丹林2号’果穗均无刺,平均果粒数为98~101粒之间,与CK差异显著。Abstract: The aim of this study was to systematically compare branch prickles, leaf prickles and fruiting characteristics of ‘Danlin No.1’ and ‘Danlin No.2’, which were selected as test Zanthoxylum armatum DC. materials with fewer prickles. The results showed that (1) the prickle number, prickle width and prickle length-width ratio of ‘Danlin No.1’ and ‘Danlin No.2’ were significantly different from the control, and the differences between them were not significant. The number of prickles on branches was 72.72% and 70.91% lower than CK respectively. There were significant differences among ‘Danlin No.1’, ‘Danlin No.2’ and CK at prickle length and prickle distance. The prickle distance was 81.14% and 37.96% higher than CK respectively. (2) The number of compound leaf leaflets of ‘Danlin No. 1’ and ‘Danlin No. 2’ was three at most cases, with no prickle on leaves and rachis. But CK compound leaf leaflets were mainly five, with tiny leaf prickles. (3) There were significant differences in ear length and ear width among ‘Danlin No.1’, ‘Danlin No.2’ and CK, with ‘Danlin No.2’ having the largest ear length and ear width, which were 12.54 cm and 7.87 cm respectively. ‘Danlin No.1’ and ‘Danlin No.2’ had no prickle cluster, and the average number of fruit was between 98 and 101, which was significantly different from CK.
-
Key words:
- Zanthoxylum armatum DC.;
- Less Prickles;
- Superior clones;
- Prickle;
- Fruiting
-
表 1 藤椒少刺无性系枝条皮刺性状对比
Tab. 1 Comparison of prickle characteristics on branches of Zanthoxylum armatum DC. clones with fewer prickles
无性系
Clone枝条基部直径/cm
Diameter at the
branch base/cm皮刺数/个
Prickle
number/individual皮刺宽/cm
Prickle
width/cm皮刺长/cm
Prickle
length/cm皮刺长宽比
Prickle length-width
ratio皮刺间距/cm
Prickle
distance/cm丹林1号 2.17±0.34 a 21.13±8.06 b 0.70±0.15 b 1.22±0.22 b 1.76±0.22 a 8.32±2.55 a 丹林2号 1.79±0.44 b 22.53±6.68 b 0.63±0.19 b 1.01±0.20 c 1.77±0.65 a 5.96±2.62 b CK 1.64±0.39 b 77.46±6.06 a 1.28±0.14 a 1.87±0.14 a 1.48±0.19 b 4.32±0.67 c 平均差异在0.05水平上显著。下同
The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.表 2 藤椒少刺无性系叶片皮刺性状对比
Tab. 2 Comparison of prickle characteristics on leaves of Zanthoxylum armatum DC. clones with fewer prickles
无性系
Clone小叶数/片
Lobular
number/piece复叶长/cm
Length of
compound leaves/cm小叶长/cm
Lobular length/cm小叶宽/cm
Lobular width/cm叶轴刺数/个
Prickle number
of rachis/
individual叶轴刺长/cm
Prickle
length of
rachis /cm叶轴刺间距/cm
Prickle distance
of rachis/cm叶片刺数/个
Prickle number
of leaf /ind vidual叶片刺长/cm
Prickle length
of leaf/cm丹林1号 3.27±0.69 b 13.00±2.20 a 6.60±1.19 ab 3.24±0.63 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 丹林2号 3.00 c 13.54±2.20 a 7.20±1.50 a 3.74±0.60 a 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b CK 5.00 a 13.65±1.52 a 6.00±0.87 b 2.74±0.36 c 4.97±1.32 a 0.37±0.14 a 2.50±0.42 a 9.13±4.15 a 0.15±0.03 a 表 3 藤椒少刺无性系结实特性对比
Tab. 3 Comparison of fruiting characteristics of Zanthoxylum armatum DC. clones with fewer prickles
无性系
Clone果序基径/cm
Diameter at the
cluster base/cm果穗长/cm
Ear length/cm果穗宽/cm
Ear width/cm果穗长宽比
Ear length-width
ratio果粒数/个
Fruits number/
individual果穗皮刺长/cm
Prickle length
of cluster/cm果穗皮刺宽/cm
Prickle length
of cluster/cm果形指数
Fruit shape index丹林1号 0.58±0.10 a 11.05±2.17 b 7.14±1.48 b 1.59±0.37 a 98.33±25.71 a 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 1.21±0.10 a 丹林2号 0.42±0.09 b 12.54±2.15 a 7.87±1.68 a 1.64±0.32 a 100.90±31.69 a 0.00±0.00 b 0.00±0.00 b 1.22±0.11 a CK 0.39±0.03 b 7.34±1.37 c 4.90±0.58 c 1.52±0.33 a 75.73±9.89 b 0.40±0.77 a 0.15±0.28 a 1.17±0.07 a -
[1] 祝磊,陈茜,黎江华,等. 藤椒来源的考证与定义的思考[J]. 中草药,2018,49(4):987−992. doi: 10.7501/j.issn.0253-2670.2018.04.036 [2] 张华,叶萌. 青花椒的分类地位及成分研究现状[J]. 北方园艺,2010(14):199−203. [3] 王丽华,赵卫红,彭晓曦,等. 四川花椒产业发展现状及对策分析研究[J]. 四川林业科技,2018,39(2):50−55. [4] 刘安成,尉倩,崔新爱,等. 花椒采收现状及研究进展[J]. 中国农机化学报,2019,40(3):84−87. [5] 安建军,杨会光,鲁维民,等. 花椒采摘机械的现状及发展趋势[J]. 农业科技与信息,2019(6):57−59. [6] 安建军,李彦荣,刘玉顺,等. 五种便携式电动花椒采摘机采摘性能比较试验[J]. 甘肃农业,2019(3):86−88. [7] 胡文. 花椒采摘方法及采摘工具的探索研究[J]. 四川林业科技,2015,36(4):148−150. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-5508.2015.04.034 [8] 侯镇礼. 植物刺的研究现状及展望[J]. 林业科技通讯,2017(10):45−47. [9] 桂鹏. 浅谈植物刺的奥秘[J]. 生物学通报,1999(6):24−25. [10] 蒋弘刚,魏安智,杨途熙,等. 花椒茎尖节点转录组测序及基因注释[J]. 西北林学院学报,2014,29(6):94−99. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2014.06.18 [11] 李孟楼. 无刺花椒农城1号[J]. 农村百事通,2014(7):29. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9119.2014.07.006 [12] 杨建雷,任苗,吕瑞娥,等. 2个陇南大红袍花椒无刺优树无性系对比研究[J]. 经济林研究,2017,35(3):30−34. [13] 任苗,种培芳,杨建雷,等. 几个无刺花椒无性系果实及皮刺性状对比研究[J]. 林业科技通讯,2018(7):7−10. [14] 吕玉奎,蒋成益,杨文英,等. 荣昌无刺花椒优良品种选育报告[J]. 林业科技,2017,42(2):18−21. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-9499.2017.02.005 [15] 王景燕,龚伟,肖千文,等. 无刺花椒新品种汉源无刺花椒[J]. 园艺学报,2016,43(2):405−406. [16] 赵昌平,王景燕,龚伟,等. 汉源葡萄青椒及其少刺变异品系光合特性研究[J]. 四川农业大学学报,2017,35(4):540−546. [17] 王生荣,吕瑞娥,魏安民,等. 无刺花椒研究进展[J]. 甘肃林业科技,2019,44(1):10−13. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0960.2019.01.003 [18] 潘虎林,周桂珍. 花椒多重嫁接对皮刺及生长结果的影响研究[J]. 林业实用技术,2014(12):44−46. [19] 陈善波, 罗德智, 王莎, 等. 一种少刺藤椒的培育方法: 中国, 109757284A[P]. 2019-05-17. [20] 陈善波, 罗德智, 王莎, 等. 一种藤椒高接换优的培育方法: 中国, 109744060A[P]. 2019-05-14.