Gomose causada por Phytophthora em combinações copa/porta-enxerto de citros com mudas formadas com borbulhas desafiadas por esse patógeno

Silva, Adielle Rodrigues da; Pinto, Kaliane Nascimento dos Santos; Santos Filho, Hermes Peixoto; Coelho Filho, Maurício Antonio; Gesteira, Abelmon da Silva

doi:10.1590/S1678-3921.pab2024.v59.03405

Adielle Rodrigues da Silva Corresponding author

Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, Departamento de Biologia, Centro de Genética e Biologia Molecular, Campus Soane Nazaré de Andrade, Rodovia Jorge Amado, Km 16, Salobrinho, CEP 45662-900 Ilhéus, BA, Brazil. E-mail: adi.elle@hotmail.com, kallysantos17@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1419-3061

Kaliane Nascimento dos Santos Pinto

Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, Departamento de Biologia, Centro de Genética e Biologia Molecular, Campus Soane Nazaré de Andrade, Rodovia Jorge Amado, Km 16, Salobrinho, CEP 45662-900 Ilhéus, BA, Brazil. E-mail: adi.elle@hotmail.com, kallysantos17@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5632-1064

Hermes Peixoto Santos Filho

Embrapa Mandioca e Fruticultura, Rua Embrapa s/nº, Chapadinha, CEP 44380-000 Cruz das Almas, BA, Brazil. E-mail: hpesse25@gmail.com, mauricio-antonio.coelho@embrapa.br, abelmon.gesteira@embrapa.br

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5144-3974

Maurício Antonio Coelho Filho

Embrapa Mandioca e Fruticultura, Rua Embrapa s/nº, Chapadinha, CEP 44380-000 Cruz das Almas, BA, Brazil. E-mail: hpesse25@gmail.com, mauricio-antonio.coelho@embrapa.br, abelmon.gesteira@embrapa.br

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4667-5535

Abelmon da Silva Gesteira

Embrapa Mandioca e Fruticultura, Rua Embrapa s/nº, Chapadinha, CEP 44380-000 Cruz das Almas, BA, Brazil. E-mail: hpesse25@gmail.com, mauricio-antonio.coelho@embrapa.br, abelmon.gesteira@embrapa.br

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7590-0455

Corresponding author

Figuras (3)
Tabelas (3)

Thumbnail

Figure 1
Schema of the challenges with Phytophthora citrophthora in combinations of ‘Pera’ orange and ‘Tahiti’ acid lime scions on ‘Indio’ citrandarin rootstock in challenge I and grafting with buds of the scion varieties from challenge I onto ‘Rangpur’ lime rootstock in challenge II.

Thumbnail

Figure 2
Area size (mm²) of the lesion in the stem of the ‘Rangpur’ lime rootstock with ‘Pera’ orange and ‘Tahiti’ acid lime scions evaluated at 90 days after inoculation with Phytophthora citrophthora. Means followed by equal lowercase letter do not differ by the Tukey’s test, at 5% probability. Challenged: inoculation in challenges I (bud initial inoculation) and II (inoculation in new scion-rootstock combination). Unchallenged: inoculation only in challenge II.

Thumbnail

Figure 3
Physiological responses in ‘Pera’ orange (PSO) and ‘Tahiti’ acid lime (TAL) leaves grafted on the ‘Rangpur’ lime rootstock, in plants formed with buds challenged and not challenged by Phytophthora citrophthora, as follows: A, internal concentration of CO2 in the leaf (Ci, µmol of CO₂ m⁻² s⁻¹); B, stomatal conductance (gs, mmol m⁻² s⁻¹); C, photosynthetic rate (A, µmol m⁻² s⁻¹); D, transpiration rate (E, µmol of H2O m⁻² s⁻¹); E, water use efficiency (WUE, mmol CO₂ mol H₂O⁻¹) ratio between A/E. Challenged: inoculation in challenges I (buds initial inoculation) and II (inoculation in a new scion-rootstock combination). Unchallenged: inoculation only in challenge II. Control (no inoculation in challenges I and II). Inoculated: inoculation only in challenge I.

Thumbnail

Table 1
Analysis of variance for plant height, stem diameter, and size of the lesion of the ‘Rangpur’ lime rootstock with ‘Pera’ orange and ‘Tahiti’ acid lime scion in plants formed with buds challenged and not challenged by Phytophthora citrophthora.

Thumbnail

Table 2
Challenge factor within the ‘Tahiti’ acid lime scion level at 30 and 60 days after inoculation (DAI) for stem diameter (mm) of the ‘Rangpur’ lime rootstock, in plants formed with buds challenged and unchallenged by Phytophthora citrophthora^(¹).

Thumbnail

Table 3
Analysis of variance for gas exchanges in ‘Pera’ orange and ‘Tahiti’ acid lime leaves grafted on the ‘Rangpur’ lime rootstock, in plants formed with buds challenged and unchallenged with Phytophthora citrophthora, as follows: internal concentration of CO2 in the leaf (Ci); stomatal conductance (gs); transpiration rate (E); photosynthetic rate (A); and efficiency of water use (WUE) ratio between A/E.

Source of variation(¹ 1 Scion: ‘Pera’ orange and ‘Tahiti’ acid lime; challenge: control, inoculated, unchallenged, and challenged plants; x, interaction between the sources of variation. * and “Significant at 5 and 1% probability, respectively. “Nonsignificant. CV, coefficient of variation. )	Plant height (cm)			Stem diameter (mm)			Lesion (mm²)
	30 DAI	60 DAI	90 DAI	30 DAI	60 DAI	90 DAI	90 DAI
Scion	0.0000**	0.0000**	0.0000**	0.0314*	0.1270^ns	0.0683^ns	0.2369^ns
Challenge	0.7240^ns	0.2993^ns	0.6725^ns	0.0107*	0.0045**	0.4641^ns	0.7854^ns
Scion x challenge	0.9509^ns	0.8357^ns	0.9756^ns	0.0324*	0.3986^ns	0.4665^ns	0.0092*
CV (%)	23.2	19.91	19.01	7.56	9.07	11.35	18.27

Challenge^(²)	30 DAI	60 DAI
Control	5,8800c	6,9854ab
Inoculated	6,0050bc	6,6183b
Unchallenged	6,4458ab	7,1571a
Challenged	6,6383a	7,2554a

Pr>Fc
Source of variation^(¹)	Days after inoculation
Source of variation^(¹)	1	2	3	10	20	60	90
Internal concentration of CO₂ in the leaf (Ci, µmol of CO₂ m⁻² s⁻¹)
Scion	0.0003**	0.0000**	0.0000^ns	0.0000**	0.0185*	0.0000**	0.0849^ns
Challenge	0.0395*	0.0018**	0.0053^ns	0.0000**	0.0036**	0.0123*	0.9529^ns
Scion x challenge	0.5293^ns	0.0576^ns	0.0113*	0.0304*	0.0067**	0.6653^ns	0.0263*
CV (%)	5.98	6.03	6.14	6.41	8.56	9.35	8.98
Stomatal conductance (gs, mmol m⁻² s⁻¹)
Scion	0.0000**	0.0000**	0.0000**	0.0104*	0.0011**	0.0045**	0.0854^ns
Challenge	0.4428^ns	0.2640^ns	0.1498^ns	0.0104*	0.0719^ns	0.0274*	0.2245^ns
Scion x challenge	0.5969^ns	0.6186^ns	0.5573^ns	0.1386^ns	0.1127^ns	0.3732^ns	0.1422^ns
CV (%)	24.3	24.8	22.7	26.98	20.97	38.40	19.39
Transpiration rate (E, µmol of H₂O m⁻² s⁻¹)
Scion	0.0000**	0.0000**	0.0000**	0.0000**	0.0000**	0.0647^ns	0.0006**
Challenge	0.4583^ns	0.7089^ns	0.4092^ns	0.4233^ns	0.3231^ns	0.6284^ns	0.0290^ns
Scion x challenge	0.9180^ns	0.6248^ns	0.5538^ns	0.1752^ns	0.3760^ns	0.4142^ns	0.0429^ns
CV (%)	14.12	17.42	16.09	15.88	10.58	28.89	12.74
Photosynthetic rate (A, µmol m⁻² s⁻¹)
Scion	0.0000**	0.000⁰**	0.0000**	0.0000**	0.2705^ns	0.3585^ns	0.1816^ns
Challenge	0.7813^ns	0.4568^ns	0.2395^ns	0.5190^ns	0.9463^ns	0.0443*	0.9913^ns
Scion x challenge	0.6163^ns	0.2542^ns	0.2727^ns	0.1337^ns	0.1991^ns	0.7197^ns	0.4004^ns
CV (%)	16.73	21.11	15.79	18.79	15.32	31.54	21.59
Efficiency of water use (WUE, mmol CO₂ mol H₂O⁻¹)
Scion	0.2525^ns	0.0224*	0.0116**	0.2915^ns	0.3560^ns	0.3508^ns	0.1815**
Challenge	0.9759^ns	0.7170^ns	0.9406*	0.0399*	0.0861^ns	0.0122*	0.1324^ns
Scion x challenge	0.8337^ns	0.0965*	0.1782*	0.0022**	0.2878^ns	0.0930^ns	0.0035^ns
CV (%)	16.72	17.04	13.86	14.63	14.74	20.86	19.08

[TFN1] ¹
Scion: ‘Pera’ orange and ‘Tahiti’ acid lime; challenge: control, inoculated, unchallenged, and challenged plants; x, interaction between the sources of variation. * and “Significant at 5 and 1% probability, respectively. “Nonsignificant. CV, coefficient of variation.

Gomose causada por Phytophthora em combinações copa/porta-enxerto de citros com mudas formadas com borbulhas desafiadas por esse patógeno

Resumo