Balanço de amido em órgãos perenes de <i>Carya illinoinensis</i> Koch em um ciclo de produção

A noz-pecã (Carya illinoinensis Koch) é uma espécie nativa do norte do México e sudeste dos Estados Unidos da América, países que dominam a produção de nozes em todo o mundo. O objetivo foi determinar o balanço de amido na raiz e no tronco, mensalmente, em duas variedades (Western e Wichita), durante um ciclo de produção. A amostragem foi sistemática. Os resultados na raiz e no tronco mostraram diferença nas concentrações de amido entre as variedades. A variedade Wichita apresentou maior concentração de amido nos 12 meses em relação à Western. A variedade Wichita, em ambos os órgãos vegetativos analisados, apresentou melhores condições de acúmulo de amido. A resposta ao maior acúmulo de amido nesta variedade foi devido aos requisitos bióticos e abióticos para o desenvolvimento, sendo menos exigentes do que outras variedades.

Termos para indexação
carboidratos; noz-pecã; reservas; Western; Wichita

Autoria

Edwin Amir Briceño Contreras

Doctorate Agricultural Production Sciences. Professor. Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias en Producción Agropecuaria. Torreón, Coahuila, México. E-mails: edwinamir320@gmail.com Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias en Producción AgropecuariaMéxicoTorreón, Coahuila, México Doctorate Agricultural Production Sciences. Professor. Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias en Producción Agropecuaria. Torreón, Coahuila, México. E-mails: edwinamir320@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9712-2164

Alejandro Moreno Reséndez

Doctorate Agricultural Sciences. Professor. Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias en Producción Agropecuaria. Torreón, Coahuila, México. E-mails: alejamorsa@hotmail.com Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias en Producción AgropecuariaMéxicoTorreón, Coahuila, México Doctorate Agricultural Sciences. Professor. Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias en Producción Agropecuaria. Torreón, Coahuila, México. E-mails: alejamorsa@hotmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8858-0190

Luis Manuel Valenzuela Núñez

Ph.D. Forest Biology. Professor. Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas. Laboratorio de Biología y Ecología Forestal. Gómez Palacio, Durango, México. E-mail: luisvn70@hotmail.com Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas. Laboratorio de Biología y Ecología ForestalMéxicoGómez Palacio, Durango, México Ph.D. Forest Biology. Professor. Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas. Laboratorio de Biología y Ecología Forestal. Gómez Palacio, Durango, México. E-mail: luisvn70@hotmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3385-3005

Cristina García De la Peña

Ph.D. Biological Sciences. Professor. Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas. Laboratorio de Medicina de la Conservación. Gómez Palacio, Durango, México. E-mail: cristina.garcia@ujed.mx Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas. Laboratorio de Medicina de la ConservaciónMéxicoGómez Palacio, Durango, México Ph.D. Biological Sciences. Professor. Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas. Laboratorio de Medicina de la Conservación. Gómez Palacio, Durango, México. E-mail: cristina.garcia@ujed.mx

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0937-4466

Rafael Rodríguez-Martínez

Doctorate Agricultural Biotechnology. Professor. Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias en Producción Agropecuaria. Torreón, Coahuila, México. E-mails: rafael.rdz.mtz@gmail.com Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias en Producción AgropecuariaMéxicoTorreón, Coahuila, México Doctorate Agricultural Biotechnology. Professor. Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias en Producción Agropecuaria. Torreón, Coahuila, México. E-mails: rafael.rdz.mtz@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2692-0393

Juan Ramón Esparza Rivera

Ph.D. Food Science and Human Nutrition. Professor. Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Gómez Palacio, Durango, México. E-mail: jresparza02001@yahoo.com Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Facultad de Ciencias QuímicasMéxicoGómez Palacio, Durango, México Ph.D. Food Science and Human Nutrition. Professor. Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Gómez Palacio, Durango, México. E-mail: jresparza02001@yahoo.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9896-8954

SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Figuras | Tabelas | Fórmulas

Figuras (2)
Tabelas (5)
Fórmulas (3)

Thumbnail

Figure 1
Comparison between the means of starch concentration in the root of pecan tree in a production cycle, in two varieties (Western and Wichita). The vertical bars show the typical error of the mean.

Thumbnail

Figure 2
Comparison between the means of starch concentration in the stem of pecan tree in a production cycle, in two varieties (Western and Wichita). The vertical bars show the typical error of the mean.

Thumbnail

Table 1
Descriptive statistics of starch concentration in root (mg g^-1 DM) of pecan tree in a production cycle in two varieties (Western and Wichita).

Thumbnail

Table 2
Factorial ANOVA of the effects in the interaction between factors: Variety-Month with respect to starch concentration in root.

Thumbnail

Table 3
Descriptive statistics of starch concentration in stem (mg • g^-1 DM) of pecan tree in a production cycle in two varieties (Western and Wichita).

Thumbnail

Table 4
Factorial ANOVA of the effects in the interaction between factors: Variety-Month with respect to starch concentration in stem.

Thumbnail

Table 5
Total biomass (dry matter) of four trees, calculated using the models of Drexhage et al. (1999) and Brucciamacchie (1982) at the experimental site.

Thumbnail

[1]

Thumbnail

[2]

Thumbnail

[3]

Figure 1 Comparison between the means of starch concentration in the root of pecan tree in a production cycle, in two varieties (Western and Wichita). The vertical bars show the typical error of the mean.

Figure 2 Comparison between the means of starch concentration in the stem of pecan tree in a production cycle, in two varieties (Western and Wichita). The vertical bars show the typical error of the mean.

Table 1 Descriptive statistics of starch concentration in root (mg g^-1 DM) of pecan tree in a production cycle in two varieties (Western and Wichita).

Variety	Month	Mean	Standar deviation	n
Western	July	30.19	0.84	16
	August	30.08	0.67	16
	September	39.47	0.51	16
	October	40.56	0.95	16
	November	39.57	0.36	16
	December	48.05	2.54	16
	January	52.27	1.79	16
	February	50.66	1.34	16
	March	41.88	1.05	16
	April	40.52	3.28	16
	May	31.34	0.92	16
	June	29.26	0.54	16
	Total	39.49	7.87	192

Wichita	July	32.86	0.81	16
	August	32.20	0.55	16
	September	42.57	1.71	16
	October	41.49	1.10	16
	November	43.44	1.78	16
	December	64.26	3.95	16
	January	65.50	5.27	16
	February	61.74	4.22	16
	March	42.11	0.92	16
	April	41.15	1.61	16
	May	34.20	1.11	16
	June	34.79	2.74	16
	Total	44.69	12.01	192

^{n =}
number of samples

Table 2 Factorial ANOVA of the effects in the interaction between factors: Variety-Month with respect to starch concentration in root.

Origin	*** of tables type III	gl	Quadratic mean	F	P
Corrected model	40391.06^a	23	1756.13	387.07	0.000
Intersection	680414.31	1	680414.31	149973.23	0.000
Variety	2600.26	1	2600.26	573.13	0.000
Month	35296.63	11	3208.78	707.26	0.000
Variety*Month	2494.16	11	226.74	49.97	0.000
Error	1633.28	360	4.53
Total	722438.66	384
Total, corrected	42024.34	383

^*
squared R = 0.961 (squared-corrected R = 0.959)

Table 3 Descriptive statistics of starch concentration in stem (mg • g^-1 DM) of pecan tree in a production cycle in two varieties (Western and Wichita).

Variety	Month	Mean	Standar deviation	n
Western	July	37.75	0.91	16
	August	34.08	1.24	16
	September	48.27	1.59	16
	October	50.51	2.06	16
	November	51.21	3.06	16
	December	39.63	0.43	16
	January	39.88	3.19	16
	February	38.49	0.76	16
	March	36.91	0.49	16
	April	37.92	0.64	16
	May	35.49	0.69	16
	June	33.42	2.15	16
	Total	40.30	6.18	192

Wichita	July	44.13	1.91	16
	August	41.17	3.90	16
	September	56.49	1.80	16
	October	61.62	3.23	16
	November	56.93	4.11	16
	December	51.14	2.00	16
	January	52.32	3.24	16
	February	50.69	1.34	16
	March	51.33	1.94	16
	April	50.63	2.30	16
	May	44.77	1.89	16
	June	44.67	5.28	16
	Total	50.49	6.46	192

^{n =}
number of samples

Table 4 Factorial ANOVA of the effects in the interaction between factors: Variety-Month with respect to starch concentration in stem.

Origin	Sum of tables type III	gl	Quadratic mean	F	P
Corrected model	23143.24^a	23	1006.22	170.16	0.000
Intersection	791411.89	1	791411.89	133834.70	0.000
Variety	9976.11	1	9976.11	1687.04	0.000
Month	12480.31	11	1134.57	191.86	0.000
Variety*Month	686.82	11	62.43	10.55	0.000
Error	2128.80	360	5.91
Total	816683.95	384
Total, corrected	25272.05	383

^*
Squared R = 0.916 (squared-corrected R = 0.910)

Table 5 Total biomass (dry matter) of four trees, calculated using the models of Drexhage et al. (1999) and Brucciamacchie (1982) at the experimental site.

	Total biomass in * **** (kg)
		**** 1	Tree 2	Tree 3	Tree 4
	Stem biomass (kg)	281.56	234.39	521.31	425.61
Western	Root biomass (kg)	107.14	85.99	224.73	176.03
	Total biomass of perennial ****** (kg)	388.70	320.38	746.04	601.64

		Tree 1	Tree 2	**** 3	Tree 4
	Stem biomass (kg)	216.22	309.29	309.29	270.07
Wichita	Root biomass (kg)	78.07	119.92	119.92	101.91
	Total biomass of perennial organs (kg)	294.29	429.21	429.21	371.98

[1]

log (root biomass (kg) = -1.56 + 2.44 * log (Diam)

[2]

total biomass of perenn ial organs (g) = -484.7 * {Diam}_{1.30} + 414.4 * {({Diam}_{1.30})}^{2}

[3]

[3] stem biomass (g) = -320.9 * {Diam}_{1.30} + 332.2 {({Diam}_{1.30})}^{2}

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

Balanço de amido em órgãos perenes de <i>Carya illinoinensis</i> Koch em um ciclo de produção

PlumX

Mensagem

[TFN0101] ^{n =}
number of samples