Selection of Superior Families of Larch Resistant to Pine Wood Nematode Disease

doi:10.7525/j.issn.1673-5102.2025.05.016

Abstract

Abstract:

In this study， 18 2-year-old Larix gmelinii families were used as materials， and the seedlings were inoculated with the highly pathogenic pine wood nematode strain FSBX by peeling casing method. By calculating the anti-symptom score， insect resistance score and disease resistance score， the larch families with resistance to pine nematode disease were comprehensively screened. Physiological indicators including contents of chlorophyll， soluble sugar， soluble protein， and activities of superoxide dismutase（SOD） and peroxidase （POD） were measured at 0^th， 5^th， 10^th and 15^th day post-inoculation， respectively. The change trend of physiological indexes of larch in the process of resistance to pine wood nematode was explored. The results indicated that larch family 1311 achieved the highest disease resistance score， followed by families 1305 and 1310. Chlorophyll content of the larch families with all resistance levels initially decreased， then increased， and then decreased again. POD activity showed a pattern of first decreasing， then increasing and then slightly declined. On the 15^th day， highly resistant families demonstrated significantly higher POD activity than that of the other families. SOD activity displayed an initial increase， followed by a decrease and peaking on the 10^th day， and highly resistant families showed significantly higher levels than that of the other families. The soluble protein content showed a trend of decreasing first and then increasing. On the 15^th day， the soluble protein content of the high-resistance family was higher than that of the other two groups， and the difference was not significant. Soluble sugar content showed a decrease-increase-decrease pattern， peaking on the 10^th day for all families， and susceptible families showed higher levels than moderate-resistance families， and that moderate-resistance families showed higher levels than high-resistance families， but there was no significant difference among the three groups. In conclusion， the high-resistance families showed significant advantages in chlorophyll content， POD and SOD activity， while the contents of soluble sugar and soluble protein were generally lower than those of the other families. However， in the later stage of inoculation， the physiological indexes of high-resistance families were higher than those of medium-resistance and susceptible families， indicating that high-resistance families could maintain high resistance in the later stage of inoculation.

Key words: Bursaphelenchus xylophilus, Larix gmelinii, family selection, physiology and biochemistry, growth characteristics

CLC Number:

S722.3

Min ZHAO, Feng WANG, Jianan WANG, Qi YU, Hanguo ZHANG, Lei ZHANG. Selection of Superior Families of Larch Resistant to Pine Wood Nematode Disease[J]. Bulletin of Botanical Research, 2025, 45(5): 827-836.

Figures/Tables 12

Table 1

Table 2

Fig.1

Table 3

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Table 4

Table 5

Fig.6

Table 6

References 25

[1]	严正梅，谈家金.我国松树体内线虫种类及其分布［J］.中国森林病虫，2019，38（5）：38-42.
	YAN Z M， TAN J J.Species and geographical distribution of parasitic nematode in pine in China［J］.Forest Pest and Disease，2019，38（5）：38-42.
[2]	程瑚瑞，林茂松，黎伟强，等.南京黑松上发生的萎蔫线虫病［J］.森林病虫通讯，1983（4）：1-5.
	CHENG H R， LIN M S， LI W Q，et al.Wilting nematode disease on Pinus thunbergii in Nanjing［J］.Forest Pest and Disease，1983（4）：1-5.
[3]	叶建仁，吴小芹.松材线虫病研究进展［J］.中国森林病虫，2022，41（3）：1-10.
	YE J R， WU X Q.Research progress of pine wilt disease［J］.Forest Pest and Disease，2022，41（3）：1-10.
[4]	LI J J， FAN G， HE Y.Predicting the current and future distribution of three coptis herbs in China under climate change conditions，using the MaxEnt model and chemical analysis［J］.Science of The Total Environment，2020，698：134141.
[5]	PREGITZER K S， KUBISKE M E， YU C K，et al.Relationships among root branch order，carbon，and nitrogen in four temperate species［J］.Oecologia，1997，111（3）：302-308.
[6]	陈广胜，郭明辉，黄冶.不同初植密度兴安落叶松人工林木材解剖特征的径向变异［J］.东北林业大学学报，2001，29（2）：12-16.
	CHEN G S， GUO M H， HUANG Y.The radial variation patterns of anatomical characteristics of larch wood for different planting density［J］.Journal of Northeast Forestry University，2001，29（2）：12-16.
[7]	郑万钧，傅立国.中国植物志：第七卷［M］.北京：科学出版社，1978：187-190.
	ZHENG W J， FU L G.Flora of China：Vol.7［M］.Beijing：Science Press，1978：187-190.
[8]	刘足根，朱教君，袁小兰，等.辽东山区长白落叶松天然更新调查［J］.林业科学，2007，43（1）：42-49.
	LIU Z G， ZHU J J， YUAN X L，et al.Investigation and analysis of the natural regeneration of Larix olgensis in mountain regions of eastern Liaoning Province，China［J］.Scientia Silvae Sinicae，2007，43（1）：42-49.
[9]	吴小芹，张艺，陈蔚诗，等.黑松13个抗病家系对松材线虫的抗性反应及组织病理学观察［J］.植物病理学报，2008，38（1）：44-50.
	WU X Q， ZHANG Y， CHEN W S，et al.Resistance and histopathological observation of wilt-resistant Pinus thunbergii families from Japan to Bursaphelenchus xylophilus ［J］.Acta Phytopathologica Sinica，2008，38（1）：44-50.
[10]	郝德君，谈家金，陈凤毛，等.黑松和马尾松苗受松材线虫侵染后部分化学物质的响应［J］.林业科学研究，2012，25（2）：218-222.
	HAO D J， TAN J J， CHEN F M，et al.Physiological response of Pinus thunbergii and Pinus massoniana to Bursaphelenchus xylophilus infection［J］.Forest Research，2012，25（2）：218-222.
[11]	秦世杰，祁金玉，刘仁军，等.自然状态下油松感染松材线虫后的生理响应［J］.沈阳农业大学学报，2021，52（5）：625-632.
	QIN S J， QI J Y， LIU R J，et al.Physiological response of Pinus tabulaeformis infected with Bursaphelenchus xylophilus in natural state［J］.Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University，2021，52（5）：625-632.
[12]	于海英，吴昊，张旭东，等.落叶松自然条件下感染松材线虫初报［J］.中国森林病虫，2019，38（4）：7-10.
	YU H Y， WU H， ZHANG X D，et al.Preliminary study on Larix spp.infected by Bursaphelenchus xylophilus in natural environment［J］.Forest Pest and Disease，2019，38（4）：7-10.
[13]	盛若成，李敏，陈军，等.两株我国南北松材线虫虫株形态指标与致病力比较［J］.南京林业大学学报（自然科学版），2019，43（6）：18-24.
	SHENG R C， LI M， CHEN J，et al.Comparison of morphological index and pathogenicity of two isolates of Bursaphelenchus xylophilus in southern and northern in China［J］.Journal of Nanjing Forestry University（Natural Sciences Edition），2019，43（6）：18-24.
[14]	CHEN Q L， ZHANG R Z， LI D L，et al.Genetic characteristics of Bursaphelenchus xylophilus third-stage dispersal juveniles［J］.Scientific Reports，2021，11（1）：3908.
[15]	姜生伟，吴昊，李德斌，等.我国东北地区松材线虫灾害特征分析［J］.中国森林病虫，2022，41（4）：9-15.
	JIANG S W， WU H， LI D B，et al.Analysis on disaster characteristics of pine wood nematode in northeast China［J］.Forest Pest and Disease，2022，41（4）：9-15.
[16]	ZHANG R Z， WANG J N， XIA R，et al.Antioxidant processes involving epicatechin decreased symptoms of pine wilt disease［J］.Frontiers in Plant Science，2022，13：1015970.
[17]	许志刚.普通植物病理学［M］.4版.北京：高等教育出版社，2009：372-375.
	XU Z G.General plant pathology［M］.4th ed.Beijing：Higher Education Press，2009：372-375.
[18]	沈李元，吴小芹，陈婷婷，等.抗松材线虫病马尾松胚性愈伤组织超低温保存［J］.东北林业大学学报，2019，47（7）：108-112.
	SHEN L Y， WU X Q， CHEN T T，et al.Cryopreservation of nematode-resistant Pinus massoniana embryogenic callus［J］.Journal of Northeast Forestry University，2019，47（7）：108-112.
[19]	SHETTY N P， JØRGENSEN H J L， JENSEN J D，et al.Roles of reactive oxygen species in interactions between plants and pathogens［J］.European Journal of Plant Pathology，2008，121（3）：267-280.
[20]	王建国，姜旭，栾庆书，等.松材线虫侵染对日本落叶松生理指标的影响［J］.西南林业大学学报（自然科学），2023，43（6）：135-140.
	WANG J G， JIANG X， LUAN Q S，et al.Effects of Bursaphelenchus xylophilus infestation on physiological indexes of Larix kaempferi ［J］.Journal of Southwest Forestry University（Natural Sciences），2023，43（6）：135-140.
[21]	尹大川，邓玉侠，祁金玉，等.接种松材线虫对樟子松生理指标的影响［J］.沈阳农业大学学报，2020，51（6）：649-655.
	YIN D C， DENG Y X， QI J Y，et al.Effects of inoculation of pine wood nematode on physiological indexes of Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica ［J］.Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University，2020，51（6）：649-655.
[22]	陈玉惠，叶建仁，魏初奖.松材线虫侵染对马尾松苯丙烷类代谢的影响［J］.林业科学，2006，42（2）：73-77.
	CHEN Y H， YE J R， WEI C J.Effect of pine wood nematode（PWN） infection on phenylpropanes metabolism in Masson pine seedlings［J］.Scientia Silvae Sinicae，2006，42（2）：73-77.
[23]	张璐，刘炳响，牟洪香，等.干旱胁迫下文冠果耐盐生理生化特性研究［J］.西南林业大学学报（自然科学），2021，41（4）：63-71.
	ZHANG L， LIU B X， MU H X，et al.Physiological and biochemical characteristics of salt tolerance in Xanthoceras sorbifolium under drought stress［J］.Journal of Southwest Forestry University（Natural Sciences），2021，41（4）：63-71.
[24]	朱长甫，陈星，王英典.植物类胡萝卜素生物合成及其相关基因在基因工程中的应用［J］.植物生理与分子生物学学报，2004，30（6）：609-618.
	ZHU C F， CHEN X， WANG Y D.Carotenoid biosynthesis in plants and application of its relative genes in gene engineering［J］.Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants，2004，30（6）：609-618.
[25]	陈玉惠，叶建仁，魏初奖，等.松材线虫对黑松、湿地松幼苗活性氧代谢的影响［J］.南京林业大学学报（自然科学版），2002，26（4）：19-22.
	CHEN Y H， YE J R， WEI C J，et al.Effects of pine wood nematode infection on metabolism of active oxygen in Japanese black pine and slash pine seedlings［J］.Journal of Nanjing Forestry University （Natural Sciences Edition），2002，26（4）：19-22.

控制授粉家系号 Controlled pollination family number	母本×父本 Female parent×male parent
1301	长73-2×长73-3
1302	长73-3×长73-1
1305	长73-3×长73-14
1306	长73-14×长73-1
1307	长73-14×长73-3
1308	长73-14×长73-14
1309	长73-14×长73-34
1310	长73-22×长73-2
1311	长73-22×长73-3
1312	长73-22×长73-14
1313	长73-22×长73-34
1314	长73-34×长73-1
1316	长73-11×日宽7
1317	长73-11×日草103
1318	长73-14×日宽7
1319	长73-14×日草103

松材线虫株系 Strain of pine wood nematode	落叶松显症指数 Symptom index of larch families
DLBX	45.4
LYBX	62.8
FSBX	69.2
Nxy61	47.9
ABX	44.5

家系 Family	抗显症得分 Anti-symptom score	排名 Rank	抗虫得分 Anti-insect score	排名 Rank	抗病得分 Disease resistance score	综合排名 Comprehensive rank
1307	22.00	18	99.28	1	30.60	1
1311	55.00	11	95.82	3	13.18	2
1305	95.22	1	91.46	6	11.12	3
1310	75.56	2	92.42	5	9.96	4
1314	52.78	12	93.81	4	8.52	5
1308	28.21	17	96.46	2	7.92	6
1316	62.22	5	88.99	8	5.65	7
1313	59.44	8	85.98	9	4.24	8
1312	33.33	16	89.53	7	3.18	9
1306	61.12	7	73.72	11	2.33	10
1317	67.22	4	66.88	13	2.03	11
1319	52.79	13	70.81	12	1.81	12
1302	44.44	14	75.19	10	1.79	13
1309	58.33	9	63.28	14	1.59	14
1301	61.11	6	53.62	15	1.32	15
1321	72.22	3	31.59	17	1.06	16
1318	55.56	10	35.08	16	0.86	17
1326	44.44	15	29.57	18	0.63	18

接种时间 Inoculation time/d	叶绿素 Chlorophyll/（mg·L^-1）
接种时间 Inoculation time/d	高抗家系 High-resistance families	中抗家系 Medium-resistance families	感病家系 Low-resistance families
0	55.78±10.62^a	40.14±4.89^b	39.07±3.89^b
5	33.16±6.16^a	26.45±1.61^a	27.55±3.68^a
10	55.39±4.87^a	36.80±7.31^b	28.25±0.83^b
15	46.27±6.08^a	34.96±2.83^b	18.47±1.01^c

接种时间 Inoculation time/d	可溶性蛋白 Soluble protein/（mg·g^-1）			可溶性糖 Soluble sugar/（mg·g^-1）
接种时间 Inoculation time/d	高抗家系 High-resistance families	中抗家系 Medium-resistance families	感病家系 Low-resistance families	高抗家系 High-resistance families	中抗家系 Medium-resistance families	感病家系 Low-resistance families
0	14.48±3.16^a	17.31±1.27^a	16.53±3.73^a	11.57±0.46^a	8.67±2.09^a	10.82±4.64^a
5	10.09±0.95^b	18.41±4.76^a	14.24±2.46^ab	15.43±3.91^a	16.05±3.43^a	11.06±2.29^a
10	16.46±5.59^a	21.20±1.09^a	18.79±3.77^a	16.72±0.28^a	17.94±2.48^a	21.60±10.90^a
15	19.40±6.07^a	15.66±2.30^a	16.39±0.00^a	12.12±5.60^a	9.93±1.96^a	9.82±2.20^a