基于传感器技术的黑藻光合速率定量研究

以"探究光照强度对黑藻光合速率的影响"为例,利用溶解氧传感器、氧气传感器、温度传感器和压强传感器,定量测定黑藻光合速率值。尝试将数字化传感技术与中学生物科学探究结合,简单、直观、精确地呈现抽象的生物学概念,激发并培养学生科学探究兴趣和能力,为中学生物学探究实验提供参考。     

光强、温度、总氮浓度对黑藻生长的影响

为寻求沉水植物生长的主效环境因子,探求富营养化水体沉水植物的衰亡机理并选择治理富营养化的先锋植物,实验选择长江中下游常见沉水植物种黑藻(Hydrilla verticillata),利用正交试验设计,通过室内静态模拟实验研究三种主要环境因子光照强度、温度、总氮浓度及其互作对黑藻断枝生长的影响。结果表明:光照强度和温度为影响黑藻生长的主效环境因子,并且光强与温度的交互作用对黑藻生长有较为显著的影响,具体表现为黑藻的生长指标(株高、生物量、分枝数)、光合指标(叶绿素a+b浓度、叶绿素a/b、叶绿体总色素含量)和生理活性指标(根活力、可溶性糖含量、MDA含量)的变化均与这两个环境因子及其互作呈显著相关;总氮浓度的变化对黑藻生长影响不大,在2-8 mg/L的总氮浓度下,黑藻均可以正常生长。根据本实验黑藻生长指标、光合色素含量以及生理活性在不同环境因子组合的变化结果可知,黑藻在5320-12000 lx光照强度、20°C-30°C、4-8 mg/L水体总氮浓度的条件下生长良好,故推测黑藻可作为春夏季富营养化水体中恢复和重建沉水植被的先锋工具种。       

衰亡期黑藻与生长期菹草交替生长对水体磷迁移的影响

为利用冷暖种交替控制水体磷污染、抑制水体富营养化,揭示湖泊演化规律和机理。研究设置单季植物组(黑藻组、菹草组)和交替生长组(黑藻组+菹草组)进行实验。交替生长组在黑藻衰亡期种植菹草,监测各组上覆水和底泥中各形态磷含量的变化,计算黑藻衰亡释放磷及菹草生长吸收磷的总量,同时测定环境因子指标。分析沉水植物交替生长(黑藻+菹草)过程对衰亡期沉水植物(黑藻组)释放磷所带来的二次污染的消减作用,并分析环境因子变化与磷含量之间的关系。实验结果表明:黑藻+菹草组显著(P<0.05)降低了上覆水中总磷(TP)、溶解性总磷(DTP)和溶解性活性磷(SRP)的浓度;显著(P<0.05)降低了间隙水中DTP和SRP的浓度。底泥TP含量黑藻组呈上升趋势,黑藻+菹草和菹草组呈下降趋势。在采用菹草生物量期望2倍于衰亡植物黑藻生物量的模拟实验条件下,每实验组沉水植物黑藻衰亡分解所释放的磷为1.51 g,沉水植物菹草生长所富集吸收的磷为1.83 g。因此,菹草具备消减黑藻所释放磷的能力,可作为冷暖种交替控制水体富营养化的备选物种。实验组磷的迁移方向分别为:黑藻组磷迁移最终方向为底泥,黑藻+菹草组和菹草组磷的迁移方向为植物。黑藻+菹草组通过提高环境中DO和ORP,使得水相中磷向沉积物相中迁移,从而使得水相中各形态磷浓度保持在相对较低的水平。     

温度和光照对黑藻生长及净化污水效果的影响

研究温度和光照对黑藻(Hydrilla verticillata(Linn.f.)Royle)生长和净化污水效果的影响。结果表明在35℃、25℃的培养中黑藻生长旺盛,经过15d的培养,植株生物量显著高于5℃的处理(P0.05),对总氮(TN)的去除率达到78%,对总磷(TP)的去除率达到98%;在15℃中黑藻生长较慢,对污水的净化效果有所下降,但对TN和TP的去除率仍达到76%和82%;在5℃的培养中黑藻的生长受到抑制,对TN和TP的去除率都仅为46%,显著低于15、25℃和35℃的处理(P0.05)。在较高光照强度(2000—4000lx)的培养中黑藻的生长和对污染物的去除率无显著差异,而在较低光照强度(1000lx)下,黑藻生长量和对TN和氨态氮(NH4-N)的去除率显著降低(P0.05)。     

对沉水植物黑藻光合作用速度的实验探究

调节影响沉水植物黑藻光合作用的外界条件,包括温度、光照强度、CO2浓度等,探究黑藻产生气泡和制造淀粉的变化情况,从2个角度探究黑藻光合作用的速度,探寻指定课时内完成"绿叶在光下制造有机物"实验的方法.     

3种沉水植物去除水体中氮磷能力研究

研究了3种沉水植物对不同质量浓度富营养化水体的净化能力,结果表明,轮叶黑藻、金鱼藻和狐尾藻对水体中的氮、磷都有很好的净化效果,对总氮去除能力从大到小依次为轮叶黑藻>金鱼藻>狐尾藻,对总磷去除能力从大到小依次为轮叶黑藻>狐尾藻>金鱼藻。实验表明,沉水植物是富营养化水体水生态系统重建的关键,在水体生态修复中,轮叶黑藻是一种很好的水体净化沉水植物。     

低浓度CO2对水车前和黑藻光合特性的影响

本实验通过对沉水植物水车前(Ottelia alismoides)和黑藻(Hydrilla verticillata)进行低浓度CO2诱导,研究其光合特性的变化.研究显示,诱导后,水车前的PEPC/Rubisco活性比值由0.45上升到4.17,黑藻由0.47上升到4.17,两种植物的C4途径光合酶PEPC和NAD-M...     

底质营养盐负荷对轮叶黑藻生长和光合荧光特性的影响

在实验室条件下,研究了用不同营养盐负荷底泥作为底质培育的轮叶黑藻(Hydrilla verticillata(L.f)Royle)的生长的效应,结果表明,在上覆水TN/TP为20-50,TP变化范围在0.03-0.05mg/L内,底质磷相对释放速率为0.33mg/(m.2d)时培育的轮叶黑藻生长最好。轮叶黑藻对环境有较强的适应性,培育期间各组光合荧光参数Fv/Fm,qP,ETRmax随培养时间均明显的升高;在非最佳生长条件下轮叶黑藻能通过自身光合荧光参数qN的升高,耗散掉过剩的光能,来对自身进行保护。     

两种沉水植物对间隙水磷浓度的影响

为研究两种根系特征的沉水植物在生长过程中对间隙水中磷浓度的影响,选取根系较多的沉水植物苦草和根系相对较少的沉水植物黑藻作为实验材料,监测底泥中间隙水各形态磷含量及环境因子的变化,探讨不同根系特征沉水植物对间隙水中磷的影响。结果表明:黑藻和苦草实验组沉积物间隙水中各形态磷的浓度均呈不同程度的降低,黑藻和苦草对于稳定水质,减少底泥中磷向水中转移具有明显的效果;沉水植物不同,底泥间隙水中溶解性总磷(DTP)和溶解性活性磷(SRP)存在明显差异。实验结束时黑藻组和苦草组间隙水中DTP的浓度分别为0.24,0.01 mg/L,SRP的浓度分别为0.22 mg/L,0.004 mg/L。间隙水中磷的形态主要以DTP和SRP为主,溶解性有机磷(DOP)的含量相对较低。沉水植物对间隙水中磷的吸收是降低间隙水中磷含量的重要原因,苦草的吸收能力大于黑藻。沉水植物根系通过降低底泥p H值,提高氧化还原电位(Eh)的方式抑制了底泥中磷的释放。     

Cu、Zn在黑藻叶片中的富集及其毒理学分析

本文以分布广泛的沉水植物———黑藻为研究对象,在人工模拟的含不同浓度的Cu、Zn污水中培养7d,研究了Cu、Zn在黑藻体内的富集及部分毒理学影响。研究表明:黑藻对Cu和Zn都有较强的富集作用,黑藻叶片中的Cu、Zn含量都随介质中金属浓度的增大而呈增长趋势,统计分析都达到极显著正相关(RCu=0.9875,P<0.01;RZn=0.9990,P<0.01)。但黑藻对Cu、Zn吸收和积累能力(以富集系数表示)不同:对Cu的富集系数为571—1328;对Zn的富集系数为346—830。这表明黑藻对Cu的吸收能力大于Zn,而富集系数随外界浓度的增大而下降,则说明较低处理浓度更有利于黑藻对金属元素的吸收。逐步提取法分析表明黑藻体内Cu是2%醋酸提取态最多,而Zn是以1mol/L的NaCl溶液提取态占优势。各结合形态的含量多少依次为:Cu:FHAc>FHCl>FNaCl>FWater>FEthanol>FResidue;Zn:FNaCl>FHAc>FHCl>FEthanol>FResidue>FWater。激光共聚焦扫描显微镜观察结果显示Cu、Zn污染后黑藻叶片自发荧光范围变窄,峰值变小,平均强度减小。扫描电镜和透射电镜观察发现,黑藻叶细胞形态和结构发生了较明显的变化,主要表现为:细胞壁扭曲,细胞变形;细胞核核仁解体,染色质凝集,核膜断裂;叶绿体类囊体膨胀,被膜破裂;线粒体嵴数目减少,线粒体呈空泡状。结果表明,Cu、Zn在黑藻叶中富集得越多,造成的毒害越重,剂量效应非常明显。     

On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta

The phylogenetic relationships of the Clitellata were investigated with a data set of published and new complete 18S rRNA gene sequences of 51 species representing 41 families. Sequences were aligned on the basis of a secondary structure model and analysed with maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. In contrast to the latter method, parsimony did not recover the monophyly of Clitellata. However, a close scrutiny of the data suggested a spurious attraction between some polychaetes and clitellates. As a rule, molecular trees are closely aligned with morphology-based phylogenies. Acanthobdellida and Euhirudinea were reconciled in their traditional Hirudinea clade and were included in the Oligochaeta with the Branchiobdellida via the Lumbriculidae as a possible link between the two assemblages. While the 18S gene yielded a meaningful historical signal for determining relationships within clitellates, the exact position of Hirudinea and Branchiobdellida within oligochaetes remained unresolved. The lack of phylogenetic signal is interpreted as evidence for a rapid radiation of these taxa. The placement of Clitellata within the Polychaeta remained unresolved. The biological reality of polytomies within annelids is suggested and supports the hypothesis of an extremely ancient radiation of polychaetes and emergence of clitellates.     

On the ontogeny of the haptor and the evolution of the Monogenea

Data on the ontogeny of the posterior haptor of monogeneans were obtained from more than 150 publications and summarised. These data were plotted into diagrams showing evolutionary capacity levels based on the theory of a progressive evolution of marginal hooks, anchors and other attachment components of the posterior haptor in the Monogenea (Malmberg, 1986). 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks are assumed to be the most primitive monogenean haptoral condition. Thus the diagrams were founded on a 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hook evolutionary capacity level, and the evolutionary capacity levels of anchors and other haptoral attachement components were arranged according to haptoral ontogenetical sequences. In the final plotting diagram data on hosts, type of spermatozoa, oncomiracidial ciliation, sensilla pattern and protonephridial systems were also included. In this way a number of correlations were revealed. Thus, for example, the number of 5 + 5 marginal hooks correlates with the most primitive monogenean type of spermatozoon and with few sensillae, many ciliated cells and a simple protonephridial system in the oncomiracidium. On the basis of the reviewed data it is concluded that the ancient monogeneans with 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks were divided into two main lines, one retaining unhinged marginal hooks and the other evolving hinged marginal hooks. Both main lines have recent representatives at different marginal hook evolutionary capacity levels, i.e. monogeneans retaining a haptor with only marginal hooks. For the main line with hinged marginal hooks the name Articulon-choinea n. subclass is proposed. Members with 8 + 8 hinged marginal hooks only are here called Proanchorea n. superord. Monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks only are here called Ananchorea n. superord. and three new families are erected for its recent members: Anonchohapteridae n. fam., Acolpentronidae n. fam. and Anacanthoridae n. fam. (with 7 + 7, 8 + 8 and 9 + 9 unhinged marginal hooks, respectively). Except for the families of Articulonchoinea (e.g. Acanthocotylidae, Gyrodactylidae, Tetraonchoididae) Bychowsky's (1957) division of the Monogenea into the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea fits the proposed scheme, i.e. monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks form one old group, the Oligonchoinea, which have 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks, and the other group form the Polyonchoinea, which (with the exception of the Hexabothriidae) has a greater number (7 + 7, 8 + 8 or 9 + 9) of unhinged marginal hooks. It is proposed that both these names, Oligonchoinea (sensu mihi) and Polyonchoinea (sensu mihi), will be retained on one side and Articulonchoinea placed on the other side, which reflects the early monogenean evolution. Except for the members of Ananchorea [Polyonchoinea], all members of the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea have anchors, which imply that they are further evolved, i.e. have passed the 5 + 5 marginal hook evolutionary capacity level (Malmberg, 1986). There are two main types of anchors in the Monogenea: haptoral anchors, with anlages appearing in the haptor, and peduncular anchors, with anlages in the peduncle. There are two types of haptoral anchors: peripheral haptoral anchors, ontogenetically the oldest, and central haptoral anchors. Peduncular anchors, in turn, are ontogenetically younger than peripheral haptoral anchors. There may be two pairs of peduncular anchors: medial peduncular anchors, ontogentically the oldest, and lateral peduncular anchors. Only peduncular (not haptoral) anchors have anchor bars. Monogeneans with haptoral anchors are here called Mediohaptanchorea n. superord. and Laterohaptanchorea n. superord. or haptanchoreans. All oligonchoineans and the oldest polyonchoineans are haptanchoreans. Certain members of Calceostomatidae [Polyonchoinea] are the only monogeneans with both (peripheral) haptoral and peduncular anchors (one pair). These monogeneans are here called Mixanchorea n. superord. Polyonchoineans with peduncular anchors and unhinged marginal hooks are here called the Pedunculanchorea n. superord. The most primitive pedunculanchoreans have only one pair of peduncular anchors with an anchor bar, while the most advanced have both medial and lateral peduncular anchors; each pair having an anchor bar. Certain families of the Articulonchoinea, the Anchorea n. superord., also have peduncular anchors (parallel evolution): only one family, the Sundanonchidae n. fam., has both medial and lateral peduncular anchors, each anchor pair with an anchor bar. Evolutionary lines from different monogenean evolutionary capacity levels are discussed and a new system of classification for the Monogenea is proposed.In agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. EditorIn agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. Editor