Figura 1
Dimensões (a: comprimento; b: largura; c: espessura; d: espessura no ponto com semente) dos frutos de Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis obtidos nos municípios de Franca (, linha cheia) e São Paulo (, linha tracejada), Estado de São Paulo, Brasil, durante o desenvolvimento e maturação. Regressões (p<0,05): Y(a) = -0,0016X3+0,195X2-7,394X+151,642, r2 = 0,73, CV = 2,75%; Y(a) = 66,20; Y(b) = -0,0006X3+0,073X2-2,792X+55,560, r2 = 0,63, CV = 2,49%; Y(b) = -0,0012X3+0,172X2-8,116X+147,74, r2 = 0,83, CV = 3,58%; Y(c) = -0,0003X3+0,032X2-1,200X+16,343, r2 = 0,90, CV = 9,89%; Y(c) = 0,004X2-0,345X+9,931, r2 = 0,82, CV = 7,33%; Y(d) = -0,0003X3+0,033X2-1,122X+14,973, r2 = 0,94, CV = 5,08%; Y(d) = 0,065X+1,343, r2 = 0,83, CV = 7,17%.
Figure 1
Dimensions (a: length; b: width; c: thickness; d: thickness at the point with seed) of fruits of Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis obtained in Franca (, full line) and São Paulo (, dashed line), São Paulo State, Brazil, during the development and maturation. Regressions (p<0.05): Y (a) = -0.0016X 3 +0.195X 2 -7.394X+151.642, r 2 = 0.73, CV = 2.75%; Y (a) = 66.20; Y (b) = -0.0006X 3 +0.073X 2 -2.792X+55.560, r 2 = 0.63, CV = 2.49%; Y (b) = -0.0012X 3 +0.172X 2 -8.116X+147.74, r 2 = 0.83, CV = 3.58%; Y (c) = -0.0003X 3 +0.032X 2 -1.200X+16.343, r 2 = 0.90, CV = 9.89%; Y (c) = 0.004X 2 -0.345X+9.931, r 2 = 0.82, CV = 7.33%; Y (d) = -0.0003X 3 +0.033X 2 -1.122X+14.973, r 2 = 0.94, CV = 5.08%; Y (d) = 0.065X+1.343, r 2 = 0.83, CV = 7.17%.
Figura 2
Dimensões (a: comprimento; b: largura; c: espessura) das sementes de Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis obtidas nos municípios de Franca (, linha cheia) e São Paulo (, linha tracejado), Estado de São Paulo, Brasil, durante o desenvolvimento e maturação. Regressões (p<0,05): Y(a) = -0,018X2+1,873X-31,659, r2 = 0,97, CV = 3,00%; Y(a) = -0,010X2+1,236X-23,371, r2 = 0,89, CV = 10,38%; Y(b) = 0,0003X3-0,059X2+3,564X-57,470, r2 = 0,98, CV = 5,20%; Y(b) = -0,010X2+1,312X-28,202, r2 = 0,94, CV = 11,10%; Y(c) = -0,0001X3+0,012X2-0,343X+3,498, r2 = 0,96, CV = 4,84%; Y(c) = 2,07.
Figure 2
Dimensions (a: length; b: width; c: thickness) of seeds of Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis obtained in Franca (, full line) and São Paulo (, dashed line), São Paulo State, Brazil, during the development and maturation. Regressions (p<0.05): Y (a) = -0.018X 2 +1.873X-31.659, r 2 = 0.97, CV = 3.00%; Y (a) = -0.010X 2 +1.236X-23.371, r 2 = 0.89, CV = 10.38%; Y (b) = 0.0003X 3 -0.059X 2 +3.564X-57.470, r 2 = 0.98, CV = 5.20%; Y (b) = -0.010X 2 +1.312X-28.202, r 2 = 0.94, CV = 11.10%; Y (c) = -0.0001X 3 +0.012X 2 -0.343X+3.498, r 2 = 0.96, CV = 4.84%; Y (c) = 2.07.
Figura 3
Teor de água de sementes (a) e frutos (c) e potenciais hídricos de sementes (b) e frutos (d) de Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis obtidos nos municípios de Franca (, linha cheia) e São Paulo (, linha tracejada), Estado de São Paulo, Brasil, durante o desenvolvimento e maturação. Regressões (p<0,05): Y(a) = 0,0019X3-0,324X2+16,556X-182,114, r2 = 0,99, CV = 2,05%; Y(a) = -0,0055X3+0,648X2-25,004X+391,587, r2 = 0,97, CV = 5,19%; Y(b) = -0,0029X3+0,337X2-13,049X+222,099, r2 = 0,91, CV = 6,85%; Y(b) = -0,0073X3+0,977X2-43,371X+693,952, r2 = 0,95, CV = 7,62%; Y(c) = -0,0008X3+0,121X2-6,007X+97,075, r2 = 0,84, CV = 25,16%; Y(c) = 0,015X2-1,410X+34,987, r2 = 0,82, CV = 17,85%; Y(d) = 0,017X2-1,439X+31,287, r2 = 0,71, CV = 42,43%; Y(d) = 0,012X2-0,957X+20,463, r2 = 0,77, CV = 35,07%.
Figure 3
Water content of seeds (a) and fruits (c) and water potential of seeds (b) and fruits (d) of Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis obtained in Franca (, full line) and São Paulo (, dashed line), São Paulo State, Brazil, during the development and maturation. Regressions (p<0.05): Y (a) = 0.0019X 3 -0.324X 2 +16.556X-182.114, r 2 = 0.99, CV = 2.05%; Y (a) = -0.0055X 3 +0.648X 2 -25.004X+391.587, r 2 = 0.97, CV = 5.19%; Y (b) = -0.0029X 3 +0.337X 2 -13.049X+222.099, r 2 = 0.91, CV = 6.85%; Y (b) = -0.0073X 3 +0.977X 2 -43.371X+693.952, r 2 = 0.95, CV = 7.62%; Y (c) = -0.0008X 3 +0.121X 2 -6.007X+97.075, r 2 = 0.84, CV = 25.16%; Y (c) = 0.015X 2 -1.410X+34.987, r 2 = 0.82, CV = 17.85%; Y (d) = 0.017X 2 -1.439X+31.287, r 2 = 0.71, CV = 42.43%; Y (d) = 0.012X 2 -0.957X+20.463, r 2 = 0.77, CV = 35.07%.
Figura 4
Teor de água de tegumentos (a), cotilédones (c) e eixos embrionários (e) e potenciais hídricos de tegumentos (b), cotilédones (d) e eixos embrionários (f) de sementes de Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis obtidas no município de Franca (), Estado de São Paulo, Brasil, durante o desenvolvimento e maturação. Regressões (p<0,05): Y(a) = -0,0105X3+1,384X2-60,166X+934,205, r2 = 0,95, CV = 6,21%; Y(b) = -0,072X2+4,702X+11,574, r2 = 0,98, CV = 4,64%; Y(c) = -0,092X2+7,392X-66,264, r2 = 0,74, CV = 13,56%; Y(d) = 0,023X2-2,048X+44,850, r2 = 0,73, CV = 52,19%; Y(e) = 0,020X2-1,727X+36,737, r2 = 0,89, CV = 36,23%; Y(f) = 0,0032X3-0,419X2+17,916X-245,459, r2 = 0,88, CV = 27,07%.
Figure 4
Water content of teguments (a), cotyledons (c) and embryonic axes (e) and water potential of teguments (b), cotyledons (d) and embryonic axes (f) of seeds of Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis obtained in Franca (), São Paulo State, Brazil, during the development and maturation. Regressions (p<0.05): Y (a) = -0.0105X 3 +1.384X 2 -60.166X+934.205, r 2 = 0.95, CV = 6.21%; Y (b) = -0.072X 2 +4.702X+11.574, r 2 = 0.98, CV = 4.64%; Y (c) = -0.092X 2 +7.392X-66.264, r 2 = 0.74, CV = 13.56%; Y (d) = 0.023X 2 -2.048X+44.850, r 2 = 0.73, CV = 52.19%; Y (e) = 0.020X 2 -1.727X+36.737, r 2 = 0.89, CV = 36.23%; Y (f) = 0.0032X 3 -0.419X 2 +17.916X-245.459, r 2 = 0.88, CV = 27.07%.
Figura 5
Conteúdo de massa seca de sementes de Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis durante o desenvolvimento e maturação: sementes íntegras (a) para Franca (, linha cheia) e São Paulo (, linha tracejada) e tegumentos (b), cotilédones (c) e eixos embrionários (d) para Franca (, linha cheia), Estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Regressões (p<0,05): Y(a) = -0,028X3+3,809X2-158,054X+2065,930, r2 = 0,95, CV = 11,07%; Y(a) = 0,299X2-20,972X+374,775, r2 = 0,93, CV = 30,54%; Y(b) = -0,0094X3+1,283X2-55,557X+791,911, r2 = 0,98, CV = 6,64%; Y(c) = -0,033X3+4,889X2-229,092X+3437,221, r2 = 0,99, CV = 10,86%; Y(d) = 0,147X-4,896, r2 = 0,94, CV = 14,42%.
Figure 5
Dry matter of seeds of Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis during development and maturation: entire seeds (a) from Franca (, full line) and São Paulo (, dash line) and teguments (b), cotyledons (c) and embryonic axes (d) from Franca (, full line), São Paulo State, Brazil. Regressions (p<0.05): Y (a) = -0.028X 3 +3.809X 2 -158.054X+2065.930, r 2 = 0.95, CV = 11.07%; Y (a) = 0.299X 2 -20.972X+374.775, r 2 = 0.93, CV = 30.54%; Y (b) = -0.0094X 3 +1.283X 2 -55.557X+791.911, r 2 = 0.98, CV = 6.64%; Y (c) = -0.033X 3 +4.889X 2 -229.092X+3437.221, r 2 = 0.99, CV = 10.86%; Y (d) = 0.147X-4.896, r 2 = 0.94, CV = 14.42%.
Figura 6
Germinação (a), plântulas com desenvolvimento normal (b), plântulas vigorosas (c) e índice de velocidade de germinação (d) para sementes de Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis obtidas nos municípios de Franca (, linha cheia) e São Paulo (, linha tracejada), Estado de São Paulo, Brasil, durante o desenvolvimento e maturação. Regressões (p<0,05): Y(a) = -0,0041X3+0,477X2-14,285X+113,164, r2 = 0,95, CV = 12,27%; Y(a) = 0,149X2-10,554X+185,707, r2 = 0,96, CV = 26,16%; Y(b) = 0,102X2-6,701X+107,420, r2 = 0,87, CV = 40,81%; Y(b) = 0,011X3-1,305X2+52,458X-694,613, r2 = 0,98, CV = 27,06%; Y(c) = 0,068X2-4,537X+73,489, r2 = 0,80, CV = 60,77%; Y(c) = 0,009 X3-1,124X2+45,802X-613,202, r2 = 0,93, CV = 52,15%; Y(d) = -0,0002X3+0,033X2-1,387X+17,820, r2 = 0,96, CV = 19,87%; Y(d) = 0,0087X2-0,678X+13,042, r2 = 0,93, CV = 38,57%.
Figure 6
Germination (a), normal seedling growth (b), strong seedling (c) and germination speed index (d) of seeds of Paubrasilia echinata E.Gagnon, H.C.Lima & G.P.Lewis obtained in Franca (, full line) and São Paulo (, dash line), São Paulo State, Brazil, during the development and maturation. Regressions (p<0.05): Y (a) = -0.0041X 3 +0.477X 2 -14.285X+113.164, r 2 = 0.95, CV = 12.27%; Y (a) = 0.149X 2 -10.554X+185.707, r 2 = 0.96, CV = 26.16%; Y (b) = 0.102X 2 -6.701X+107.420, r 2 = 0.87, CV = 40.81%; Y (b) = 0.011X 3 -1.305X 2 +52.458X-694.613, r 2 = 0.98, CV = 27.06%; Y (c) = 0.068X 2 -4.537X+73.489, r 2 = 0.80, CV = 60.77%; Y (c) = 0.009 X 3- 1.124X 2 +45.802X-613.202, r 2 = 0.93, CV = 52.15%; Y (d) = -0.0002X 3 +0.033X 2 -1.387X+17.820, r 2 = 0.96, CV = 19.87%; Y (d) = 0.0087X 2 -0.678X+13.042, r 2 = 0.93, CV = 38.57%.
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
