Increased assimilates in lily yearling bulblets by fertilizer supplement of magnetic nano-composite

Shafiei-Masouleh, Seyedeh-Somayyeh

doi:10.1590/2447-536X.v25i3.2057

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Scientific Article • Ornam. Hortic. 25 (3) • Jul-Sep 2019 • https://doi.org/10.1590/2447-536X.v25i3.2057 copy

Increased assimilates in lily yearling bulblets by fertilizer supplement of magnetic nano-composite

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

In bulb production period, the promotion of photosynthesis and, consequently, increased synthesis of carbohydrates have the particular importance to enhance the size and quality of the bulbs. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of chitosan and magnetism on the synthesis of photosynthetic compounds. Magnetic nano-composite (MN) and carboxymethyl chitosan (CM) during the production period of yearling bulblet were used as experimental materials. The results showed that MN (15 mg L^-1) had the highest effects on the amounts of photosynthetic pigments. Compared to other treatments, this treatment had the highest effect on starch, while the soluble carbohydrates and amylase activities showed the highest amount with CM (5 to 15 mg L^-1). However, due to the importance of starch in bulb size and quality, MN with a concentration of 15 mg L^-1 is recommended.

Keywords:
Lilium; bulb; magnetism; photosynthesis; soluble carbohydrates

Treatments	Chl a	Chl b	Chl (a+b)	Chl (a/b)	Carotenoid	Chl/Carotenoid
IS	0.64 ± 0.02 ab	0.32 ± 0.02 ab	0.95 ± 0.04 ab	2.02 ± 0.04	0.15 ± 0.002 ab	6.38 ± 0.22
CM1	0.9 ± 0.02 ab	0.42 ± 0.06 ab	1.22 ± 0.15 ab	1.96 ± 0.07	0.21 ± 0.005 ab	6.3 ± 0.16
CM2.5	0.62 ± 0.2 ab	0.32 ± 0.12 ab	0.94 ± 0.34 ab	1.85 ± 0.1	0.16 ± 0.05 ab	6.76 ± 0.73
CM5	0.6 ± 0.2 ab	0.29 ± 0.1 ab	0.89 ± 0.31 ab	1.88 ± 0.18	0.2 ± 0.02 ab	7.3 ± 1.06
CM10	0.77 ± 0.06 ab	0.38 ± 0.02 ab	1.16 ± 0.08 ab	2.02 ± 0.07	0.19 ± 0.003 ab	6.09 ± 0.32
CM15	0.5 ± 0.05 b	0.24 ± 0.03 b	0.74 ± 0.08 a	2.08 ± 0.02	0.12 ± 0.02 b	5.92 ± 0.17
MN1	0.36 ± 0.06 b	0.28 ± 0.004 ab	0.82 ± 0.03 ab	1.97 ± 0.05	0.14 ± 0.01 ab	5.87 ± 0.13
MN2.5	0.5 ± 0.14 b	0.25 ± 0.06 ab	0.74 ± 0.2 b	1.97 ± 0.06	0.13 ± 0.03 b	5.77 ± 0.06
MN5	0.9 ± 0.13 ab	0.44 ± 0.08 ab	1.32 ± 0.2 ab	2.02 ± 0.04	0.18 ± 0.04 ab	5.83 ± 0.11
MN10	0.54 ± 0.02 b	0.18 ± 0.03 b	0.82 ± 0.03 b	1.98 ± 0.01	0.09 ± 0.01 b	5.66 ± 0.14
MN15	1.08 ± 0.05 a	0.52 ± 0.03 a	1.59 ± 0.08 a	2.02 ± 0.04	0.27 ± 0.02 a	6.01 ± 0.11
ANOVA	^ Significance at P ≤ 0.01,	^* * significance at P ≤ 0.05,	^ Significance at P ≤ 0.01,	ns	^* * significance at P ≤ 0.05,	ns
CV%	21.62	23.43	22.75	6.72	22.86	11.78

Parameters	Chl a	Chl b	Chl (a+b)	Chl (a/b)	Carotenoid	Chl/Carotenoid
Chl a	1.00
Chl b	0.912^ Correlation at P ≤ 0.01,	1.00
Chl (a+b)	0.959^ Correlation at P ≤ 0.01,	0.958^ Correlation at P ≤ 0.01,	1.00
Chl (a/b)	0.170	0.136	0.180	1.00
Carotenoid	0.827^ Correlation at P ≤ 0.01,	0.903^ Correlation at P ≤ 0.01,	0.858^ Correlation at P ≤ 0.01,	- 0.078	1.00
Chl/Carotenoid	0.031	0.067	0.032	- 0.689^* * correlation at P ≤ 0.05 (two-tailed), N = 11	0.353	1.00

Treatment	Starch^b	Sucrose	Glucose	Fructose	α-amylase	β-amylase
IS	758 ± 243.5 c	1.87 ± 0.54 bc	2.71 ± 0.21 d	2.17 ± 0.18 d	8.4 ± 0.44 dc	26.5 ± 2.67 bc
CM1	783 ± 31.25 c	2.18 ± 0.19 abc	3.16 ± 0.11 cd	2.15 ± 0.12 d	12.37 ± 1.11 abc	38.57 ± 4.28 abc
CM2.5	983 ± 218.75 c	2.64 ± 0.32 abc	4.55 ± 0.39 abc	2.44 ± 0.13 cd	14.47 ± 0.42 ab	47.33 ± 3.69 a
CM5	3868 ± 145.12 b	3.63 ± 0.37 a	5.45 ± 0.31a	2.59 ± 0.13 abcd	15.57 ± 0.54 a	42.07 ± 2.61 ab
CM10	7326 ± 1087.5 ab	2.97 ± 0.23 ab	4.58 ± 0.29abc	3.15 ± 0.13abc	14.03 ± 0.52 ab	29.1 ± 2.00 bc
CM15	2870 ± 206.25b	2.38 ± 0.18 abc	4.8 ± 0.26ab	3.31 ± 0.1a	12.8 ± 0.75 ab	26.7 ± 2.64 bc
MN1	9614 ± 3262.5 ab	1.24 ± 0.22 c	2.79 ± 0.2 d	1.81 ± 0.16 d	7.97 ± 0.93 d	24.37 ± 1.44 c
MN2.5	5720 ± 406.25 ab	1.26 ± 0.24 c	3.04 ± 0.21 d	1.98 ± 0.12 d	8.33 ± 0.56 cd	24.53 ± 2.78 c
MN5	6533± 3031.25 ab	1.85 ± 0.19 bc	3.21 ± 0.13 cd	2.5 ± 0.15 bcd	10.11 ± 0.78 bcd	31.43 ± 2.84 abc
MN10	4408 ± 393.75 ab	3.097 ± 0.28 ab	3.69 ± 0.14 bcd	3.25 ± 0.28 ab	10.50 ± 0.61 bcd	36.7 ± 3.18 abc
MN15	11314 ± 950a	2.63 ± 0.26 abc	3.85 ± 0.15 bcd	3.13 ± 0.14 abc	10.77 ± 0.78 bcd	38.23 ± 2.38 abc
ANOVA	^ Significance at P ≤ 0.01 based on variance analysis.	^ Significance at P ≤ 0.01 based on variance analysis.	^ Significance at P ≤ 0.01 based on variance analysis.	^ Significance at P ≤ 0.01 based on variance analysis.	^ Significance at P ≤ 0.01 based on variance analysis.	^ Significance at P ≤ 0.01 based on variance analysis.
CV%	39.65	21.59	10.69	10.44	10.94	14.95

Parameters	Starch	Sucrose	Glucose	Fructose	α-amylase	β-amylase
Starch	1.00
Sucrose	- 0.143	1.00
Glucose	- 0.110	0.816^ Correlation at P ≤ 0.01,	1.00
Fructose	0.147	0.691^* * correlation at P ≤ 0.05 (two-tailed correlation), N = 11.	0.610^* * correlation at P ≤ 0.05 (two-tailed correlation), N = 11.	1.00
α-amylase	- 0.305	0.811^ Correlation at P ≤ 0.01,	0.903^ Correlation at P ≤ 0.01,	0.461	1.00
β-amylase	- 0.271	0.669^* * correlation at P ≤ 0.05 (two-tailed correlation), N = 11.	0.501	0.207	0.675^* * correlation at P ≤ 0.05 (two-tailed correlation), N = 11.	1.00

Linear model
Variable	B		β		t test		significance
Variable	Sucrose	Glucose	Sucrose	Glucose	Sucrose	Glucose	Sucrose	Glucose
constant	- 0.30	0.22			- 0.456	0.379	0.658	0.713
α-amylase	0.23	0.31	0.81	0.90	4.164	6.302	0.002	0.000
Standard error	0.46	0.42
R²	0.658	0.81
ANOVA
	df		MS		F test		significance
Regression	1	1	3.74	6.89	17.34	39.721	0.002	0.000
Residual	9	9	0.22	0.173
Total	10	10

Sociedade Brasileira de Floricultura e Plantas Ornamentais Av. Av. Peter Henry Rolfs, s/n, 36570-000 - Viçosa, Minas Gerais - Brasil, (32) 3379-4983, Tel: (32) 3379-4983 - Viçosa - MG - Brazil
E-mail: editor.ornamentalhorticulture@gmail.com

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Corresponding Author: shafiee.masouleh@areeo.ac.ir; shafyii@gmail.com