Desempenho da laranjeira ‘Valência’ enxertada sobre porta-enxertos híbridos de trifoliateiro

Domingues, Allan Ricardo; Marcolini, Ciro Daniel Marques; Gonçalves, Carlos Henrique da Silva; Silva, Carlos Eduardo Alves da; Roberto, Sergio Ruffo; Carlos, Eduardo Fermino

Allan Ricardo Domingues

Universidade Estadual de Londrina, Rodovia Celso Garcia Cid, PR 445, Km 380, Caixa Postal 10.011, CEP 86057-970 Londrina, PR, Brazil. E-mail: allanrdomingues@gmail.com, carloshg@itaipu.gov.br, sroberto@uel.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8137-9910

Ciro Daniel Marques Marcolini

Instituto de Desenvolvimento Rural do Paraná, Rodovia Celso Garcia Cid, Km 375, CEP 86047-902 Londrina, PR, Brazil. E-mail: ciromarcolini@emater.pr.gov.br, carlos.ramed@gmail.com, efcarlos@idr.pr.gov.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2642-6021

Carlos Henrique da Silva Gonçalves

Universidade Estadual de Londrina, Rodovia Celso Garcia Cid, PR 445, Km 380, Caixa Postal 10.011, CEP 86057-970 Londrina, PR, Brazil. E-mail: allanrdomingues@gmail.com, carloshg@itaipu.gov.br, sroberto@uel.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6107-6362

Carlos Eduardo Alves da Silva

Instituto de Desenvolvimento Rural do Paraná, Rodovia Celso Garcia Cid, Km 375, CEP 86047-902 Londrina, PR, Brazil. E-mail: ciromarcolini@emater.pr.gov.br, carlos.ramed@gmail.com, efcarlos@idr.pr.gov.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1650-4097

Sergio Ruffo Roberto Corresponding author

Universidade Estadual de Londrina, Rodovia Celso Garcia Cid, PR 445, Km 380, Caixa Postal 10.011, CEP 86057-970 Londrina, PR, Brazil. E-mail: allanrdomingues@gmail.com, carloshg@itaipu.gov.br, sroberto@uel.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2357-187X

Eduardo Fermino Carlos

Instituto de Desenvolvimento Rural do Paraná, Rodovia Celso Garcia Cid, Km 375, CEP 86047-902 Londrina, PR, Brazil. E-mail: ciromarcolini@emater.pr.gov.br, carlos.ramed@gmail.com, efcarlos@idr.pr.gov.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0852-7002

Corresponding author

Figuras (1)
Tabelas (5)

Thumbnail

Figure 1
Principal component analysis of production (PROD), canopy volume (CV), production efficiency (PE), technological index (TI), soluble solids (SS), titratable acidity (TA), maturation index or SS/TA ratio, industrial yield (IY), and juice yield (JY) of ‘Valê ncia’ sweet orange (Citrus sinensis) grafted onto 20 rootstocks, showing: A, treatment dispersion according to the scores of the main components; and B, variable arrangement according to the scores of the main components. US852Citrand, ‘US-852’ citrandarin; US801Citrand, ‘US-801’ citrandarin; US812Citrand, ‘US-812’ citrandarin; IPEACS256Citrand, IPEACS-256 citrandarin; IPEACS239Citrand, IPEACS-239 citrandarin; IPEACS264 Citrand, IPEACS-264 citrandarin; F8018Citrum, F.80-18 citrumelo; F803Citrum, F.80-3 citrumelo; F805Citrum, F.80-5 citrumelo; F806Citrum, F.80-6 citrumelo; F807Citrum, F.80-7 citrumelo; F80-8Citrum, F.80-8 citrumelo; W2Citrum, ‘W-2’ citrumelo; SwiCitrum, ‘Swingle’ citrumelo; RangLimSourOra, ‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange; US802Pumm, ‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid; MurTagTriT9: ‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9; Trif, trifoliate orange; FlyDr, ‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange; and RangLim, ‘Rangpur’ lime. Species: citrandarin, Citrus reticulata × Poncirus trifoliata; citrumelo, Citrus paradisi × P. trifoliata; ‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange, Citrus limonia × Citrus aurantium; ‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid, Citrus grandis × P. trifoliata; ‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9, C. reticulata × C. sinensis; trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata; ‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata var. monstrosa; and ‘Rangpur’ lime, C. limonia.

Thumbnail

Table 1
Tree growth development of ‘Valência’ sweet orange (Citrus sinensis) grafted on 20 rootstocks in the 2016, 2017, and 2018 harvest seasons⁽¹⁾ (1) Means followed by equal letters do not differ by the Scott-Knott test, at 5% probability. Trees were planted in April, 2013. .

Thumbnail

Table 2
Production per tree and accumulated production per tree of ‘Valência’ sweet orange (Citrus sinensis) grafted on 20 rootstocks in the 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 harvest seasons⁽¹⁾ (1) Means followed by equal letters do not differ by the Scott-Knott test, at 5% probability. Trees were planted in April, 2013. .

Thumbnail

Table 3
Productive efficiency of ‘Valência’ sweet orange (Citrus sinensis) trees grafted on 20 rootstocks in the 2016, 2017, and 2018 harvest seasons⁽¹⁾ (1) Means followed by equal letters do not differ by the Scott-Knott test, at 5% probability. Trees were planted in April, 2013. .

Thumbnail

Table 4
Chemical and industrial properties of juices of ‘Valência’ sweet orange (Citrus sinensis) trees grafted on 20 rootstocks in the 2017, 2018, and 2019 harvest seasons⁽¹⁾ (1) Means followed by equal letters do not differ by the Scott-Knott test, at 5% probability. Trees were planted in April, 2013. .

Thumbnail

Table 5
Quick reference chart about the influence of 20 rootstock genotypes on canopy volume, production, productive efficiency, technological index, and industrial yield of ‘Valência’ sweet orange (Citrus sinensis) trees.

Rootstock⁽²⁾	Canopy height (m)			Canopy diameter (m)			Canopy volume (m³)
Rootstock⁽²⁾	2016	2017	2018	2016	2017	2018	2016	2017	2018
‘US-852’ citrandarin	2.9a	3.1b	3.5c	2.1b	2.4a	2.5a	7.2b	9.3b	11.6b
‘US-801’ citrandarin	2.9a	3.2b	3.6c	2.3a	2.4a	2.6a	8.1a	9.6b	11.9b
‘US-812’ citrandarin	2.7b	2.9c	3.0e	2.2a	2.4a	2.5a	6.9b	8.5c	9.5c
IPEACS-256 citrandarin	2.9a	2.9c	3.4c	2.3a	2.4a	2.5a	7.7a	8.8c	11.1b
IPEACS-239 citrandarin	2.2d	2.4d	2.7e	2.1b	2.3a	2.3b	5.2c	6.2d	7.4d
IPEACS-264 citrandarin	2.9a	3.1b	3.8b	2.2a	2.4a	2.6a	7.5a	9.5b	12.7a
F.80-18 citrumelo	1.7e	1.9e	2.1g	1.6d	1.9c	2.0d	2.3e	3.6e	4.1e
F.80-3 citrumelo	2.2d	2.4d	2.7e	1.9c	2.2b	2.2c	4.4c	5.9d	6.6d
F.80-5 citrumelo	2.0d	2.4d	2.4f	1.9c	2.1b	2.1c	3.8d	5.1d	5.4e
F.80-6 citrumelo	2.5b	2.7c	3.1d	2.1b	2.4a	2.4b	5.8b	8.2c	9.5c
F.80-7 citrumelo	2.8b	3.3b	3.8b	2.1b	2.4a	2.4b	6.7b	9.3b	11.8b
F.80-8 citrumelo	2.4c	2.8c	3.2d	2.1b	2.3a	2.4b	5.5c	7.7c	9.5c
‘W-2’ citrumelo	2.7b	3.0c	3.7b	2.1b	2.4a	2.5a	6.7b	9.1b	12.1b
‘Swingle’ citrumelo	2.6b	2.9c	3.5c	2.1b	2.4a	2.5a	6.2b	8.7c	11.2b
‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange	3.1a	3.5a	4.2a	2.3a	2.5a	2.6a	8.8a	10.8a	14.6a
‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid	2.6b	2.7c	3.0e	2.0c	2.4a	2.4b	5.4c	7.9c	8.9c
‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9	2.6b	2.8c	3.2d	2.1b	2.3a	2.4b	5.9b	7.5c	9.0c
Trifoliate orange	2.4c	2.5d	2.7e	2.0c	2.4a	2.4b	4.8c	6.8d	8.0d
‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange	1.7e	1.9e	2.0g	1.7d	1.9c	1.9d	2.5e	3.4e	3.7e
‘Rangpur’ lime	3.1a	3.5a	3.9b	2.3a	2.5a	2.6a	8.3a	10.9a	13.4a
F-value	25.3^ Significant at 1% probability.	23.8^ Significant at 1% probability.	24.0^ Significant at 1% probability.	9.7^ Significant at 1% probability.	12.6^ Significant at 1% probability.	14.5^ Significant at 1% probability.	19.2^ Significant at 1% probability.	22.6^ Significant at 1% probability.	23.3^ Significant at 1% probability.

Rootstock⁽²⁾ (2) Species: citrandarin, Citrus reticulata × Poncirus trifoliata; citrumelo, Citrus paradisi × P. trifoliata; ‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange, Citrus limonia × Citrus aurantium; ‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid, Citrus grandis × P. trifoliata; ‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9, C. reticulata × C. sinensis; trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata; ‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata var. monstrosa; and ‘Rangpur’ lime, C. limonia. CV, coefficient of variation.	Production per tree (kg per tree)				Accumulated production (kg per tree)
	2016	2017	2018	2019	Accumulated production (kg per tree)
‘US-852’ citrandarin	36.5d	115.8a	123.8a	72.2a	348.3a
‘US-801’ citrandarin	47.9d	134.9a	104.0a	88.5a	375.3a
‘US-812’ citrandarin	58.6c	111.0a	84.3b	55.5b	309.3b
IPEACS-256 citrandarin	71.6b	122.6a	111.2a	58.5b	363.9a
IPEACS-239 citrandarin	62.7c	79.5b	69.5c	54.6b	266.3c
IPEACS-264 citrandarin	61.4c	123.0a	104.0a	70.6a	359.1a
F.80-18 citrumelo	23.5e	40.1c	107.0a	42.5b	213.0d
F.80-3 citrumelo	47.7d	77.7b	103.6a	72.2a	296.2b
F.80-5 citrumelo	42.0d	60.8b	89.5b	50.5b	242.8c
F.80-6 citrumelo	33.3e	80.3b	82.5b	77.6a	273.6c
F.80-7 citrumelo	53.7c	113.9a	53.7d	77.9a	299.0b
F.80-8 citrumelo	41.2d	78.0b	40.4e	68.5a	227.3c
‘W-2’ citrumelo	57.1c	119.5a	57.1d	94.1a	327.8b
‘Swingle’ citrumelo	47.7d	105.8a	47.7d	84.1a	285.3b
‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange	68.2b	134.5a	68.2c	86.9a	357.7a
‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid	25.9e	73.4b	25.9e	71.9a	198.0d
‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9	51.4c	102.6a	51.4d	58.0b	263.4c
Trifoliate orange	31.0e	77.0b	30.9e	64.2b	203.0d
‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange	36.4d	35.7c	36.4e	25.5b	134.0e
‘Rangpur’ lime	83.6a	144.1a	83.6b	105.9a	417.1a
F-value	14.3^ Significant at 1% probability.	11.8^ Significant at 1% probability.	23.5^ Significant at 1% probability.	3.4^ Significant at 1% probability.	11.5^ Significant at 1% probability.
CV (%)	17.3	18.8	16.6	29.4	14.7

Rootstock⁽²⁾ (2) Species: citrandarin, Citrus reticulata × Poncirus trifoliata; citrumelo, Citrus paradisi × P. trifoliata; ‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange, Citrus limonia × Citrus aurantium; ‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid, Citrus grandis × P. trifoliata; ‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9, C. reticulata × C. sinensis; trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata; ‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata var. monstrosa; and ‘Rangpur’ lime, C. limonia. CV, coefficient of variation.	Productive efficiency (kg m^-3)
	2016	2017	2018
‘US-852’ citrandarin	5.1d	12.6a	10.6c
‘US-801’ citrandarin	6.0d	14.1a	9.0c
‘US-812’ citrandarin	8.8c	13.0a	8.7c
IPEACS-256 citrandarin	9.4c	13.9a	10.0c
IPEACS-239 citrandarin	13.4a	13.0a	9.6c
IPEACS264 citrandarin	8.3c	12.8a	8.1c
F.80-18 citrumelo	10.6b	11.1b	26.6a
F.80-3 citrumelo	9.9b	13.7a	15.9b
F.80-5 citrumelo	11.9b	12.1a	16.8b
F.80-6 citrumelo	5.5d	9.7b	8.8c
F.80-7 citrumelo	8.5c	12.2a	4.7d
F.80-8 citrumelo	7.7c	10.4b	4.4d
‘W-2’ citrumelo	8.7c	13.1a	4.7d
‘Swingle’ citrumelo	8.1c	12.3a	4.4d
‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange	7.8c	12.5a	4.7d
‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid	5.2d	9.3b	2.9d
‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9	9.1c	13.7a	5.7d
Trifoliate orange	6.6d	11.4b	3.9d
‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange	14.9a	10.5b	9.9c
‘Rangpur’ lime	10.1b	13.2a	6.2d
F-value	6.0^ Significant at 5 and 1% probability, respectively.	1.7^* * and	36.2^ Significant at 5 and 1% probability, respectively.
CV (%)	24.1	17.6	21.4

Rootstock⁽²⁾ (2) Species: citrandarin, Citrus reticulata × Poncirus trifoliata; citrumelo, Citrus paradisi × P. trifoliata; ‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange, Citrus limonia × Citrus aurantium; ‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid, Citrus grandis × P. trifoliata; ‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9, C. reticulata × C. sinensis; trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata; ‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata var. monstrosa; and ‘Rangpur’ lime, C. limonia. CV, coefficient of variation.	Soluble solids - SS (°Brix)			Titratable acidity - TA (%)			Maturation index (SS/TA)
	2017	2018	2019	2017	2018	2019	2017	2018	2019
‘US-852’ citrandarin	9.9b	9.1	12.1b	0.9	0.5b	0.8a	10.9b	18.6	15.3b
‘US-801’ citrandarin	9.8b	9.6	11.6b	0.9	0.5b	0.7b	11.2b	19.6	16.0b
‘US-812’ citrandarin	10.6a	9.9	12.4a	0.9	0.6a	0.8a	11.6b	18.7	15.4b
IPEACS-256 citrandarin	10.4a	9.7	12.7a	0.9	0.5b	0.8a	11.7b	20.0	16.6a
IPEACS-239 citrandarin	10.7a	9.9	12.7a	1.0	0.6a	0.8a	10.8b	16.8	15.6b
IPEACS-264 citrandarin	10.4a	9.5	12.5a	0.9	0.5b	0.9a	11.2b	18.1	14.0b
F.80-18 citrumelo	10.5a	8.8	12.1b	1.0	0.5b	0.7b	10.8b	16.9	16.2a
F.80-3 citrumelo	10.7a	9.4	11.4b	0.9	0.5b	0.7b	12.2a	18.5	16.5a
F.80-5 citrumelo	10.6a	9.6	11.6b	0.8	0.5b	0.7b	13.0a	20.7	17.4a
F.80-6 citrumelo	10.8a	9.3	12.6a	0.8	0.5b	0.7b	13.6a	19.1	19.5a
F.80-7 citrumelo	10.2a	8.8	12.5a	0.9	0.5b	0.8a	11.2b	17.3	15.0b
F.80-8 citrumelo	10.7a	9.8	12.8a	0.8	0.5b	0.7b	12.9a	20.5	17.9a
‘W-2’ citrumelo	10.4a	9.3	12.3a	0.9	0.5b	0.8a	12.2a	18.3	15.1b
‘Swingle’ citrumelo	10.9a	9.5	13.3a	0.8	0.5b	0.8a	13.0a	20.2	17.1a
‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange	9.5b	8.9	11.8b	0.9	0.5b	0.9a	11.1b	18.4	13.6b
‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid	10.8a	9.5	12.4a	1.0	0.5b	0.7b	11.3b	19.0	16.9a
‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9	9.8b	9.1	12.0b	0.8	0.6a	0.8a	12.0a	17.4	14.4b
Trifoliate orange	10.7a	9.3	13.2a	0.9	0.5b	0.8a	11.8a	18.1	15.9b
‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange	11.1a	10.4	12.7a	0.9	0.6a	0.7b	12.6a	18.7	17.6a
‘Rangpur’ lime	9.1b	8.8	11.4b	0.8	0.5b	0.9a	11.2b	17.2	13.4b
F-value	3.9^* * and	2.0^ns ns Nonsignificant.	6.0^* * and	1.4^ns ns Nonsignificant.	2.0^ Significant at 5 and 1% probability, respectively.	3.0^* * and	2.3^* * and	1.7^ns ns Nonsignificant.	4.0^* * and
Rootstock⁽²⁾ (2) Species: citrandarin, Citrus reticulata × Poncirus trifoliata; citrumelo, Citrus paradisi × P. trifoliata; ‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange, Citrus limonia × Citrus aurantium; ‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid, Citrus grandis × P. trifoliata; ‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9, C. reticulata × C. sinensis; trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata; ‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata var. monstrosa; and ‘Rangpur’ lime, C. limonia. CV, coefficient of variation.	Juice yield (%)			Industrial yield⁽³⁾ (3) Number of boxes of 40.8 kg per ton of frozen concentrated orange juice.			Technological index⁽⁴⁾ (4) Kilogram of SS per box of 40.8 kg. CV, coefficient of variation.
	2017	2018	2019	2017	2018	2019	2017	2018	2019
‘US-852’ citrandarin	63.2	50.7a	55.5	259.3	353.6a	242.0a	2.6	1.9b	2.7b
‘US-801’ citrandarin	64.5	52.9a	61.5	259.3	317.0b	226.1b	2.6	2.1a	2.9a
‘US-812’ citrandarin	58.0	55.1a	57.3	266.8	300.3b	230.2b	2.5	2.2a	2.9a
IPEACS-256 citrandarin	56.6	56.0a	60.5	279.4	299.0b	210.9b	2.4	2.2a	3.1a
IPEACS-239 citrandarin	59.9	55.1a	59.5	256.5	295.9b	214.5b	2.6	2.2a	3.1a
IPEACS-264 citrandarin	59.5	54.5a	58.3	262.8	314.4b	223.0b	2.5	2.1a	3.0a
F.80-18 citrumelo	53.3	41.0c	54.5	295.5	410.5a	247.8a	2.3	1.5b	2.7b
F.80-3 citrumelo	53.8	51.4a	54.8	283.2	337.1b	259.4a	2.3	2.0a	2.6b
F.80-5 citrumelo	59.1	52.4a	61.8	260.0	326.2b	226.3b	2.5	2.0a	2.9a
F.80-6 citrumelo	58.4	52.0a	52.9	256.4	355.6a	244.5a	2.6	2.0a	2.7b
F.80-7 citrumelo	55.5	52.5a	55.4	287.9	361.0a	235.0a	2.3	1.9b	2.8b
F.80-8 citrumelo	57.5	54.1a	56.4	264.4	306.7b	224.4b	2.5	2.2a	2.9a
‘W-2’ citrumelo	54.5	53.4a	56.1	288.9	321.1b	236.5a	2.3	2.0a	2.8b
‘Swingle’ citrumelo	56.1	52.4a	57.8	265.8	328.1b	211.6b	2.5	2.0a	3.1a
‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange	62.6	48.7b	57.0	272.8	375.9a	240.0a	2.4	1.8b	2.8b
‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid	55.6	53.8a	58.7	272.7	316.1b	222.7b	2.4	2.1a	3.0a
‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9	60.5	44.8c	55.3	275.4	371.6a	243.1a	2.4	1.7b	2.7b
Trifoliate orange	58.2	47.7b	56.8	263.1	366.6a	216.1b	2.5	1.8b	3.0a
‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange	57.0	51.0a	56.4	257.5	305.6b	226.7b	2.6	2.2a	2.9a
‘Rangpur’ lime	60.8	49.5a	57.4	299.0	373.4a	249.0a	2.3	1.8b	2.7b
F-value	1.2^ns ns Nonsignificant.	3.6^* * and	1.5^ns ns Nonsignificant.	0.8^ns ns Nonsignificant.	3.2^* * and	2.4^* * and	0.7^ns ns Nonsignificant.	4.3^* * and	2.4^* * and

Rootstock⁽¹⁾ (1) Species: citrandarin, Citrus reticulata × Poncirus trifoliata; citrumelo, Citrus paradisi × P. trifoliata; ‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange, Citrus limonia × Citrus aurantium; ‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid, Citrus grandis × P. trifoliata; ‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9, C. reticulata × C. sinensis; trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata; ‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange, P. trifoliata var. monstrosa; and ‘Rangpur’ lime, C. limonia.	Canopy volume (m³)⁽²⁾ (2) Classified as: low, > 3.5≥8.0; intermediate, > 8.0 <10.0; high, > 10.0 <12.0; and very high, > 12.	Production (kg per tree)⁽³⁾ (3) Classified as: optimum, > 85 <105; good, > 70 <85; intermediate, > 55 <70; and poor, <55.	Productive efficiency (kg m^-3)⁽⁴⁾ (4) Classified as: optimum, > 12; good, > 10.0 <12.0; intermediate, > 7.5 <10.0; and poor, <7.5.	Technological index (kg of SS per box of 40.8 kg)⁽⁵⁾ (5) Classified as: optimum, ≥2.5; good, > 2.0 <2.5; intermediate, > 1.8 <2.0; and poor, <2.0.	Industrial yield (No. of boxes of 40.8 kg per ton of concentrated juice)⁽⁶⁾ (6) Classified as: optimum, <280; good, > 280 <300; intermediate, > 300 <320; and poor, > 300. Classification based on means of production per tree, productive efficiency, technological index, and industrial yield in the 2016, 2017, and 2018 harvest seasons, as well as on canopy volume in the 2018 harvest season when the citrus orchard reached the mature stage.
‘US-852’ citrandarin	High	Optimum	Intermediate	Good	Good
‘US-801’ citrandarin	High	Optimum	Intermediate	Optimum	Optimum
‘US-812’ citrandarin	Intermediate	Good	Intermediate	Optimum	Optimum
IPEACS-256 citrandarin	High	Optimum	Intermediate	Optimum	Optimum
IPEACS-239 citrandarin	Low	Intermediate	Intermediate	Optimum	Optimum
IPEACS-264 citrandarin	Very high	Optimum	Poor	Optimum	Optimum
F.80-18 citrumelo	Low	Poor	Optimum	Good	Intermediate
F.80-3 citrumelo	Low	Good	Good	Good	Good
F.80-5 citrumelo	Low	Intermediate	Good	Optimum	Optimum
F.80-6 citrumelo	Intermediate	Intermediate	Poor	Good	Good
F.80-7 citrumelo	High	Good	Poor	Good	Intermediate
F.80-8 citrumelo	Intermediate	Intermediate	Poor	Optimum	Optimum
‘W-2’ citrumelo	Very high	Good	Poor	Good	Good
‘Swingle’ citrumelo	Intermediate	Good	Poor	Optimum	Optimum
‘Rangpur’ lime × sour orange	Very high	Optimum	Poor	Good	Good
‘US-802’ pummelo hybrid	Intermediate	Poor	Poor	Optimum	Good
‘Murcott’ tangor × trifoliate-9	Intermediate	Intermediate	Intermediate	Good	Good
Trifoliate orange	Low	Poor	Poor	Optimum	Optimum
‘Flying Dragon’ trifoliate orange	Low	Poor	Intermediate	Optimum	Optimum
‘Rangpur’ lime	Very high	Optimum	Intermediate	Good	Intermediate

[1] Corresponding author

Brasil

Brasil

Desempenho da laranjeira ‘Valência’ enxertada sobre porta-enxertos híbridos de trifoliateiro

Resumo