Growth and Nutrition of Eucalypt Rooted Cuttings Promoted by Ectomycorrhizal Fungi in Commercial Nurseries

Gandini, Andrezza Mara Martins; Grazziotti, Paulo Henrique; Rossi, Márcio José; Grazziotti, Danielle Cristina Fonseca Santos; Gandini, Elizzandra Marta Martins; Silva, Enilson de Barros; Ragonezi, Carla

doi:10.1590/01000683rbcs20150075

Andrezza Mara Martins Gandini

Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Programa de Pós-graduação em Produção Vegetal, Diamantina, Minas Gerais, Brasil.

Paulo Henrique Grazziotti ^** Corresponding author. E-mail:grazziot@yahoo.com.br

Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Departamento de Engenharia Florestal, Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias, Diamantina, Minas Gerais, Brasil.

Márcio José Rossi

Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Departamento de Microbiologia, Imunologia e Parasitologia, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brasil.

Danielle Cristina Fonseca Santos Grazziotti

Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Programa de Pós-graduação em Produção Vegetal, Diamantina, Minas Gerais, Brasil.

Elizzandra Marta Martins Gandini

Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Programa de Pós-graduação em Produção Vegetal, Diamantina, Minas Gerais, Brasil.

Enilson de Barros Silva

Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Departamento de Agronomia, Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias, Diamantina, Minas Gerais, Brasil.

Carla Ragonezi

Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Programa de Pós-graduação em Produção Vegetal, Diamantina, Minas Gerais, Brasil.

* Corresponding author. E-mail:grazziot@yahoo.com.br

Figures (2)
Tables (3)

Thumbnail

Figure 1
Collar diameter (a), shoot height (b), shoot dry matter (c) and colonized root length (d) of Eucalyptus urophyllarooted cuttings that received increasing inoculum application rates of Amanita muscaria, Elaphomyces anthracinus, Pisolithus microcarpus, and Scleroderma areolatum and grown for 90 days in a commercial nursery. Dash-dot line shows results for non-inoculated rooted cuttings without substrate fertilization reduction (commercial). Since the commercial sapling was not colonized, the dotted line is absent in (d). * and **: significant at, respectively, 5 and 1 % by the “t” test; ns: not significant. LSD: least significant difference.

Thumbnail

Figure 2
Leaf concentrations and contents of P (a, b), N (c, d), and K (e, f) for Eucalyptus urophylla rooted cuttings that received increasing inoculum application rates of Amanita muscaria, Elaphomyces anthracinus,Pisolithus microcarpus, and Scleroderma areolatum and grown for 90 days in a commercial nursery. Dash-dot line shows results for non-inoculated rooted cuttings without substrate fertilization reduction (commercial). * and **: significant at, respectively, 5 and 1 % by the “t” test; ns: not significant. LSD: least significant difference.

Thumbnail

Table 1
Summary of ANOVA table for all variables analyzed

Thumbnail

Table 2
Root dry matter and Dickson Quality Index for Eucalyptus urophylla rooted cuttings that received increasing inoculum rates of Amanita muscaria,Elaphomyces anthracinus, Pisolithus microcarpus, and Scleroderma areolatumand grown for 90 days in a commercial nursery

Thumbnail

Table 3
Correlation matrix between collar diameter, shoot height, shoot dry matter, root dry matter, Dickson Quality Index, colonized root length, and leaf concentrations and contents of P, N, and K forEucalyptus urophylla rooted cuttings that received increasing inoculum application rates of Amanita muscaria, Elaphomyces anthracinus,Pisolithus microcarpus, and Scleroderma areolatum and grown for 90 days in a commercial nursery

Variable	Rate (R)	Fungi (F)	R × F	Commercial x factorial design	CV	MSR
					%
Collar diameter	**	ns	ns	**	2.58	0.0016
Shoot height	**	ns	ns	**	1.75	0.0032
Shoot dry matter	*	ns	ns	**	15.93	17,475.66
Root dry matter	ns	**	ns	**	17.66	5,895.76
Colonized root length	**	ns	ns	**	14.68	0.0978
Dickson Quality Index	ns	ns	ns	ns	27.35	0.0001
P leaf concentration	**	**	**	**	8.54	0.0058
P leaf content	**	*	**	ns	29.41	0.0172
N leaf concentration	**	ns	ns	ns	20.63	11.0877
N leaf content	**	ns	ns	**	34.43	8.1055
K leaf concentration	**	ns	ns	*	14.97	12.5376
K leaf content	**	ns	ns	**	24.98	9.2611

Fungus	Commercial⁽¹⁾	Calcium alginate beads with mycelium per mini-cutting				Mean

		0	5	10	15
	Root dry mass (mg per plant)
A. muscaria		410^*	401^*	368^*	448^*	407 AB
E. anthracinus		435^*	375^*	439^*	437^*	422 AB
P. microcarpus		381^*	377^*	342^*	373^*	368 B
S. areolatum		486^*	522^*	403^*	445^*	464 A
Mean	747	428	419^*	388	426	415
	Dickson Quality Index
A. muscaria		0.03^*	0.04^*	0.03^*	0.05^*	0.04
E. anthracinus		0.04^*	0.04^*	0.04^*	0.05^*	0.04
P. microcarpus		0.04^*	0.04^*	0.03^*	0.03^*	0.04
S. areolatum		0.04^*	0.05^*	0.03^*	0.05^*	0.04
Mean	0.11	0.04	0.04^*	0.03	0.04	0.04

Variable	Collar diameter	Shoot height	Shoot dry matter	Root dry matter	Dickson Quality Index	Colonized root length	P leaf concentration	P leaf content	N leaf concentration	N leaf content	K leaf concentration
Shoot height	0.638**
Shoot dry matter	0.608**	0.794**
Root dry matter	0.286*	0.563**	0.681**
Dickson Quality Index	0.489**	0.659**	0.963**	0.771**
Colonized root length	0.139^ns	0.070^ns	-0.104^ns	-0.235^ns	-0.214^ns
P leaf concentration	-0.009^ns	-0.182^ns	-0.296^ns	-0.266^ns	-0.329^ns	0.401**
P leaf content	0.336**	0.165^ns	0.390**	0.101^ns	0.352**	0.361**	0.616**
N leaf concentration	0.098^ns	0.025^ns	-0.063^ns	-0.250^ns	-0.132^ns	0.570**	0.282*	0.286*
N leaf content	0.393**	0.406**	0.611**	0.253*	0.566**	0.328**	-0.013^ns	0.591**	0.660**
K leaf concentration	0.238^ns	0.347**	0.142**	0.030^ns	0.035^ns	0.441**	0.382**	0.375**	0.453**	0.343**
K leaf content	0.516**	0.656**	0.808**	0.485**	0.742**	0.163^ns	-0.034^ns	0.615**	0.233^ns	0.768**	0.599**

[1] * Corresponding author. E-mail:grazziot@yahoo.com.br

Brasil

Brasil

Growth and Nutrition of Eucalypt Rooted Cuttings Promoted by Ectomycorrhizal Fungi in Commercial Nurseries

Crescimento e Nutrição de Mudas Clonais de Eucalipto Promovidos por Fungos Ectomicorrízicos em Viveiros Comerciais

ABSTRACT