AVANÇOS NA PROPAGAÇÃO DA RAMBUTEIRA

A realidade da fruticultura brasileira tem demostrando crescente demanda de informações sustentáveis sobre frutíferas nativas e exóticas, as quais possam diversificar e elevar a eficácia da exploração de frutas. Pesquisas em propagação em frutíferas tem grande importância para que se possa fornecer um protocolo para adequada multiplicação dessa frutífera. Devido a grande diversidade genética das plantas de rambutan, para estabelecimento de pomares comerciais da cultura, recomenda-se o uso de plantas propagadas vegetativamente. Este trabalho teve como objetivo avaliar a propagação de rambuteira por estaquia, alporquia, enxertia, bem como a germinação por sementes e a viabilidade no armazenamento. Pelos resultados dos trabalhos nota-se que a frutífera pode ser propagada por alporquia, enxertia e por sementes, e se existir a necessidade de armazenamento de sementes que não ultrapasse um período de seis dias e sejam mantidas dentro dos frutos, não houve diferenças consideráveis na germinação nos substratos testados neste experimento.

Termos para indexação
Nephelium lappaceum L; enxertia; alporquia; estaquia

Autoria

RENATA APARECIDA DE ANDRADE

Agricultural Engineer, Assistance Professor, Dr., Department of Plant Production, UNESP/ FCAV, Jaboticabal Campus. Via de acesso Prof. Dr. Paulo Donato Castellane, s/n, CEP 14884-900, Jaboticabal-SP. e-mail: reandrad@fcav.unesp.br Universidade Estadual PaulistaBrasilJaboticabal, SP, Brasil Agricultural Engineer, Assistance Professor, Dr., Department of Plant Production, UNESP/ FCAV, Jaboticabal Campus. Via de acesso Prof. Dr. Paulo Donato Castellane, s/n, CEP 14884-900, Jaboticabal-SP. e-mail: reandrad@fcav.unesp.br

LÍVIA FELÍCIO BARRETO

Agricultural Engineer Msc., PhD student at FCAV/UNESP Câmpus de Jaboticabal, Plant Production Program, e-mail: liviafbarreto@hotmail.com Universidade Estadual PaulistaBrasilJaboticabal, SP, Brasil Agricultural Engineer Msc., PhD student at FCAV/UNESP Câmpus de Jaboticabal, Plant Production Program, e-mail: liviafbarreto@hotmail.com

GUILHERME NACATA

Agricultural Engineer, PhD student at ESALQ/USP, e-mail: guilherme_nacata@hotmail.com Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz da Universidade de São PauloBrasilPiracicaba, SP, Brasil Agricultural Engineer, PhD student at ESALQ/USP, e-mail: guilherme_nacata@hotmail.com

VICTOR GALÁN SAUCO

Agricultural Engineer, Ph.D: Research Professor (retired) Instituto Canario de Investigaciones Agrarias, Canary islands Spain. Actually Consultant in Tropical Fruits. e-mail: vgalan46@gmail.com Instituto Canario de Investigaciones AgrariasEspanhaEspanha Agricultural Engineer, Ph.D: Research Professor (retired) Instituto Canario de Investigaciones Agrarias, Canary islands Spain. Actually Consultant in Tropical Fruits. e-mail: vgalan46@gmail.com

SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Figuras | Tabelas

Figuras (3)
Tabelas (11)

Thumbnail

FIGURE 1
Appearance of rambutan layering roots in spring (a), summer (b), autumn (c) and winter (d). Jaboticabal, 2012.

Thumbnail

FIGURE 2
Initial growth of rambutan seedlings, height in cm for 14 weeks.

Thumbnail

FIGURE 3
Initial growth of rambutan seedlings, stem diameter in cm for 14 weeks.

Thumbnail

TABLE 1
Setting average (%) of the treatments Whip graft (WhG), Clef graft (CG), Wedge graft (WG) and Inverted wedge graft (IWG), with graft protection materials: biodegradable and plastic ribbon in 2 types of rootstocks: leafless and leafy in grafts performed with rambutan in two experiments: 1 – fall/winter (100 DAG) and 2 – spring/summer (116 DAG) days after the grafting (DAG).

Thumbnail

TABLE 2
Comparison of setting averages (%) in grafting by whip graft and clef graft in rambutan with Biodegradable ribbon and Plastic ribbon as protective materials and, leafless and leafy rootstock, in experiment 1.

Thumbnail

TABLE 3
Interaction deployment of Graft protection (Biodegradable ribbon and Plastic ribbon) x Rootstock (Leafless and Leafy) for number of rambutan growths in experiment 1.

Thumbnail

TABLE 4
Interaction deployment of Grafting method (Whip graft – WhG and Clef graft – CG) x Rootstock protection (Biodegradable ribbon and Plastic ribbon) x rootstock (Leafless and Leafy), in the length of the sprouts (cm) in rambutan plants in experiment 1.

Thumbnail

TABLE 5
Interaction deployment of Grafting method (Whip graft – WhG and Clef graft – CG) x Rootstock (Leafless and Leafy), in the setting (%) in rambutan plants in experiment 2.

Thumbnail

TABLE 6
Interaction deployment of Grafting method (Whip graft – WhG and Clef graft – CG) x Graft protection (Biodegradable ribbon and Plastic ribbon) x Rootstock (Leafless and Leafy), for the number of sprouts in experiment 2.

Thumbnail

TABLE 7
Interaction deployment of Grafting method (Whip graft – WhG and Clef graft – CG) x Rootstock (Leafless and Leafy), in the average length in grafts performed with rambutan plants, in experiment 2. Taquaritinga, SP, 2013.

Thumbnail

TABLE 8
Result of the statistical analysis for percentage of survival, rooting and callousing in rambutan layering. Jaboticabal, 2012.

Thumbnail

TABLE 9
Evolution of germination percentage of rambutan seeds, in function of the substrate, during six weeks.

Thumbnail

TABLE 10
Results of the statistical analysis for germination percentage of rambutan seeds submitted to different temperatures, periods and storage conditions.

Thumbnail

TABLE 11
Results of the statistical analysis for germination percentage of rambutan seeds submitted to different temperatures, periods and storage conditions.

FIGURE 1 Appearance of rambutan layering roots in spring (a), summer (b), autumn (c) and winter (d). Jaboticabal, 2012.

FIGURE 2 Initial growth of rambutan seedlings, height in cm for 14 weeks.

FIGURE 3 Initial growth of rambutan seedlings, stem diameter in cm for 14 weeks.

TABLE 1 Setting average (%) of the treatments Whip graft (WhG), Clef graft (CG), Wedge graft (WG) and Inverted wedge graft (IWG), with graft protection materials: biodegradable and plastic ribbon in 2 types of rootstocks: leafless and leafy in grafts performed with rambutan in two experiments: 1 – fall/winter (100 DAG) and 2 – spring/summer (116 DAG) days after the grafting (DAG).

Treatments			Setting (%)
Treatments			Experiment
Graft method	Graft protection	Rootstock	1	2
WhG	Biodegradable	Leafless	57.5	12.5
WhG	Biodegradable	Leafy	2.5	10
WhG	Plastic	Leafless	32.5	7.5
WhG	Plastic	Leafy	0	12.5
CG	Biodegradable	Leafless	45	17.5
CG	Biodegradable	Leafy	7.5	12.5
CG	Plastic	Leafless	27	12.5
CG	Plastic	Leafy	5	2.5
WG	Biodegradable	Leafless	0	5
WG	Biodegradable	Leafy	0	2.5
WG	Plastic	Leafless	0	0
WG	Plastic	Leafy	0	0
IWG	Biodegradable	Leafless	5	2.5
IWG	Biodegradable	Leafy	0	0
IWG	Plastic	Leafless	0	0
IWG	Plastic	Leafy	0	0

^*
Original data

TABLE 2 Comparison of setting averages (%) in grafting by whip graft and clef graft in rambutan with Biodegradable ribbon and Plastic ribbon as protective materials and, leafless and leafy rootstock, in experiment 1.

Graft protection	Setting (%)
Biodegradable	28.13a
Plastic	16.25 b
Rootstock	Setting (%)
Leafless	40.65a
Leafy	3.75 b
CV (%)	16.28

^*
Averages followed by the same letter for graft or rootstock protection did not differ statistically by the Tukey test at 5% (p> 0.05) probability. Original data

TABLE 3 Interaction deployment of Graft protection (Biodegradable ribbon and Plastic ribbon) x Rootstock (Leafless and Leafy) for number of rambutan growths in experiment 1.

Graft protection	Rootstock
Graft protection	Leafless	Leafy
Biodegradable	1.90 bA	0.88 aA
Plastic	3.55 aA	0.56 aB
CV (%)**	9,44

^*
Averages followed by the same letter in line do not differ from each other by Tukey test at 5% probability. Original data

TABLE 4 Interaction deployment of Grafting method (Whip graft – WhG and Clef graft – CG) x Rootstock protection (Biodegradable ribbon and Plastic ribbon) x rootstock (Leafless and Leafy), in the length of the sprouts (cm) in rambutan plants in experiment 1.

Graft method	Graft protection x Rootstock
Graft method	Biodegradable x Leafless	Biodegradable x Leafy	Plastic x Leafless	Plastic x Leafy
WhG	10.11 aA	3.52 aB	4.05 aAB	0.00aB
CG	9.02 aA	3.11 aAB	3.53aAB	0.54aB
CV (%)	15.06

^*
Averages followed by the same letter in line do not differ from each other by Tukey test at 5% probability. Original data.

TABLE 5 Interaction deployment of Grafting method (Whip graft – WhG and Clef graft – CG) x Rootstock (Leafless and Leafy), in the setting (%) in rambutan plants in experiment 2.

Graft method	;Rootstock
Graft method	Leafless	Leafy
WhG	10.00 aA	11.25 aA
CG	15.00 aA	7.50 aB
CV (%)	23.59

^*
Averages followed by the same letter in column do not differ from each other by Tukey test at 5% probability. Original data

TABLE 6 Interaction deployment of Grafting method (Whip graft – WhG and Clef graft – CG) x Graft protection (Biodegradable ribbon and Plastic ribbon) x Rootstock (Leafless and Leafy), for the number of sprouts in experiment 2.

Graft method	Graft protection x Rootstock
Graft method	Biodegradable x Leafless	Biodegradable x Leafy	Plastic x Leafless	Plastic x Leafy
WhG	1.00 aAB	1.00 aAB	0.25 aB	3.00 aA
CG	1.55 aA	1.33 aA	1.38 aA	0.50 bA
CV (%)	8.44

^*
Averages followed by the same letter in column do not differ from each other by Tukey test at 5% probability. Original data

TABLE 7 Interaction deployment of Grafting method (Whip graft – WhG and Clef graft – CG) x Rootstock (Leafless and Leafy), in the average length in grafts performed with rambutan plants, in experiment 2. Taquaritinga, SP, 2013.

Graft method	Rootstock
Graft method	Leafless	Leafy
WhG	6.67bB	17.18aA
CG	16.83aA	9.76aB
CV (%)	23.21

^*
Averages followed by the same letter in column do not differ from each other by Tukey test at 5% probability. Original data.

TABLE 8 Result of the statistical analysis for percentage of survival, rooting and callousing in rambutan layering. Jaboticabal, 2012.

Time of the year (TY)	Survival (%)	Rooting (%)	Presence of calluses (%)
Spring	90.00 a	63.00	22.82
Summer	42.60 B	36.77	37.54
Fall	90.00 A	39.71	42.99
Winter	83.29 A	26.18	59.01
F test
TY	11.540 **	1.499 NS	1.763 NS
CV (%)	19.62	68.44	62.00

¹
In each column, for each factor, averages followed by the same capital letter do not differ from each other by the "Tukey test", at 5% probability
^NS
: not significant (p>0.05);
^*
significant (p>0.05) and
^**
significant (p>0.01).
^{CV %:}
coefficient of variation.

TABLE 9 Evolution of germination percentage of rambutan seeds, in function of the substrate, during six weeks.

	% Germination
Substrate	1	2	3	4	5	6
Vermiculite	0.00 a	42.50 a	97.50 a	100.00 a	100.00 a	100.00 a
Pinus	0.00 a	28.75 a	95.00 a	98.75 a	100.00 a	100.00 a
Coconut fiber	0.00 a	7.50 b	67.50 b	95.00 a	96.25 a	100.00 a
CV		28.9220	14.3909	4.4222	4.3849
DMS		14.9885	24.6232	8.5487	8.5487

^*
Averages followed by the same letter in column do not differ from each other Turkey test, 5% probability.

TABLE 10 Results of the statistical analysis for germination percentage of rambutan seeds submitted to different temperatures, periods and storage conditions.

TABLE 10 Results of the statistical analysis for germination percentage of rambutan seeds submitted to different temperatures, periods and storage conditions. 1 In each column, for each factor, averages followed by the same capital letter do not differ from each other by the "Tukey test", at 5% probability. NS : not significant(p>0.05); * : significant (p>0.05) ** : significant (p>0.01). CV %: coefficient of variation.

¹
In each column, for each factor, averages followed by the same capital letter do not differ from each other by the "Tukey test", at 5% probability.
^NS
: not significant(p>0.05);
^*
: significant (p>0.05)
^**
: significant (p>0.01).
^{CV %:}
coefficient of variation.

TABLE 11 Results of the statistical analysis for germination percentage of rambutan seeds submitted to different temperatures, periods and storage conditions.

Environment (E)	Temperature (T)
Environment (E)	20ºC	25ºC	30ºC	35ºC	40ºC
Normal	40.09 A b	54.63 A a	54.66 A a	42.09 A b	0.00 A c
Cold room	35.65 B b	47.96 B a	39.00 B ab	31.82 B b	0.00 A c
Environment (E)	Days of Storage (DS)
Environment (E)	0	3	6	9	12
Normal	63.88 A a	56.98 A a	46.24 A b	24.39 A c	0.00 A d
Cold room	63.88 A a	47.07 B b	29.19 B c	13.38 B d	0.92 A e
Temperature (T)	Days of Storage (DS)
Temperature (T)	0	3	6	9	12
20⁰C	90.00 A a	57.83 B b	34.61 B c	6.91 BC d	0.00 A d
25⁰C	85.39 A a	75.88 A ab	62.78 A b	32.42 A c	0.00 A d
30⁰C	81.70 A a	67.23 AB b	48.62 AB c	34.32 A c	2.30 A d
35⁰C	62.30 B a	59.17 B a	42.56 B b	20.76 AB c	0.00 A d
40⁰C	0.00 C a	0.00 C a	0.00 C a	0.00 C a	0.00 A a

¹
Averages followed by the same capital letters in columns and lower case in line do not differ from each other by Tukey test at 5% probability

Como citar

copiar

Sociedade Brasileira de Fruticultura Via de acesso Prof. Paulo Donato Castellane, s/n , 14884-900 Jaboticabal SP Brazil, Tel.: +55 16 3209-7188/3209-7609 - Jaboticabal - SP - Brazil
E-mail: rbf@fcav.unesp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

Versão para download de PDF

PDF

Inglês

Versões e tradução automática

Versão original do texto

English

Tradução automática

Google Translator
Microsoft Translator

Como citar

RIS

BIBTEX

Outros formatos de citação e exportação:

SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online
Rua Dr. Diogo de Faria, 1087 – 9º andar – Vila Clementino 04037-003 São Paulo/SP - Brasil
E-mail: scielo@scielo.org

Leia a Declaração de Acesso Aberto

Métricas

AVANÇOS NA PROPAGAÇÃO DA RAMBUTEIRA

PlumX

Mensagem

[TFN0101] ^*
Original data