Evolução da nutrição mineral na formação de porta-enxertos e mudas de frutíferas

A importância da nutrição mineral para as diversas espécies de plantas é reconhecida há muitos anos. Por estarem diretamente ligados aos processos fisiológicos e metabólicos, os nutrientes favorecem o crescimento de porta-enxertos e mudas, contribuindo para a formação de pomares mais produtivos. Em razão da carência de informações técnicas para a maioria das frutíferas, a fertilização em viveiros ainda é feita de forma empírica, por vezes subestimando ou superestimando as exigências nutricionais e comprometendo a qualidade das plantas produzidas. Tendo em vista a importância da nutrição mineral na formação de mudas com qualidade, bem como a escassez de informações científicas, a presente revisão objetiva despertar o interesse para novas pesquisas, além de contribuir para a produção de mudas de frutíferas nutricionalmente equilibradas.

Termos para indexação
viveiros; fertilização; diagnose nutricional

Autoria

William Natale

Senior Visiting Professor, Federal University of Ceará / CCA. Fortaleza - CE, Brazil. CNPq Fellow and CAPES / Funcap Fellow. Email: natale@ufc.br Universidade Federal do CearáBrasilFortaleza, CE, Brasil Senior Visiting Professor, Federal University of Ceará / CCA. Fortaleza - CE, Brazil. CNPq Fellow and CAPES / Funcap Fellow. Email: natale@ufc.br

Antonio João de Lima Neto

Doctorate course in Plant Science, Federal University of Viçosa / UFV. Viçosa - MG, Brazil. Email: limanetoagro@hotmail.com Universidade Federal de ViçosaBrasilViçosa, MG, Brasil Doctorate course in Plant Science, Federal University of Viçosa / UFV. Viçosa - MG, Brazil. Email: limanetoagro@hotmail.com

Danilo Eduardo Rozane

Associate Professor, Sao Paulo State University, Unesp - SP, Brazil. CNPq Fellow. Email: danilo.rozane@unesp.br Universidade Estadual de São PauloBrasilRegistro, SP, Brasil Associate Professor, Sao Paulo State University, Unesp - SP, Brazil. CNPq Fellow. Email: danilo.rozane@unesp.br

Léon Etienne Parent

Full Professor, Universtité Laval. Québec – Canadá. Email: leon-etienne.parent@fsaa.ulaval.ca Université LavalCanadáQuebec, Canadá Full Professor, Universtité Laval. Québec – Canadá. Email: leon-etienne.parent@fsaa.ulaval.ca

Márcio Cleber de Medeiros Corrêa

Associate Professor, Federal University of Ceará / CCA. Fortaleza - CE, Brazil. Email: mcleber@ufc.br Universidade Estadual do CearáBrasilFortaleza, CE, Brasil Associate Professor, Federal University of Ceará / CCA. Fortaleza - CE, Brazil. Email: mcleber@ufc.br

SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Tabelas

Tabelas (5)

Thumbnail

Table 1
Amount of macronutrients accumulated in rootstocks and seedlings of different species.

Thumbnail

Table 2
Amount of total dry matter mass (TDM) and micronutrients accumulated in rootstocks and seedlings of different species.

Thumbnail

Table 3
Macronutrient doses that promoted maximum growth in rootstocks and seedlings of different species, as reported by different studies.

Thumbnail

Table 4
Foliar content and macronutrient content range for rootstocks and seedlings of different species, as reported by different studies.

Thumbnail

Table 5
Foliar content and micronutrient content range for rootstocks and seedlings of different species, as reported by different studies.

Table 1 Amount of macronutrients accumulated in rootstocks and seedlings of different species.

N	P	K	Ca	Mg	S	Reference
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - g plant^-1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CITRUS
1.918	0.352	1.322	1.509	0.291	0.205	Rezende et al. (2010)^1/
0.153	0.015	0.844	0.079	0.013	0.003	Tecchio et al. (2006) ^2/
STAR FRUIT TREE
1.058	0.159	0.871	0.347	0.123	0.147	Freitas et al. (2011) ^3/
1.423	0.163	0.943	0.447	0.243	0.166	Rozane et al. (2011b)^4/
1.378	0.177	0.913	0.430	0.241	0.175	Rozane et al. (2011b)^5/
0.634	0.088	0.368	0.152	0.106	0.098	Rozane et al. (2013) ^6/
GUAVA TREE
0.552	0.064	0.726	0.293	0.039	0.073	Franco et al. (2007) ^7/
0.585	0.066	0.696	0.302	0.041	0.066	Franco et al. (2007) ^8/
0.340	0.044	0.380	0.173	0.033	0.040	Augostinho et al. (2008) ^9/>
SOURSOP TREE
0.177	0.008	0.012	0.159	0.022	- - -	Barbosa et al. (2003) ^10/

^*
1/ Rangpur lime rootstocks and ‘Pêra’ orange scion, 260 DAE; 2/ ‘Swingle’ citrumelo rootstock, 100 DAT; 3/ ‘Nota 10’ seedlings, 150 DAS; 4/ and 5/ ‘Malásia’ rootstocks, grafted on ‘B-10’ and ‘Golden Star’, respectively, 308 DAT; 6/ ‘Malásia’ rootstocks, 125 DAT; 7/ and 8/ ‘Paluma’ and ‘Século XXI’ seedlings, respectively, 120 DAT; 9/ ‘Pedro Sato’ seedlings, 120 DAT; 10/ ‘Morada’ seedlings, 195 days after transplant.

Table 2 Amount of total dry matter mass (TDM) and micronutrients accumulated in rootstocks and seedlings of different species.

TDM	B	Cu	Fe	Mn	Zn	Reference
g plant^-1	- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - mg plant^-1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CITRUS
31.66	- -	0.256	4.644	2.003	0.104	Rezende et al. (2010)^1/
7.38	0.223	0.907	0.988	0.694	0.236	Tecchio et al. (2006) ^2/
STAR FRUIT TREE
45.65	1.753	0.616	28.071	5.850	2.271	Freitas et al. (2011)^3/
57.11	1.981	1.593	11.878	3.622	1.404	Rozane et al. (2011b) ^4/
58.76	1.885	1.431	12.544	3.680	1.349	Rozane et al. (2011b)^5/
23.12	0.722	0.096	2.936	2.165	0.780	Rozane et al. (2013) ^6/
GUAVA TREE
23.63	0.632	0.134	8.103	3.052	0.760	Franco et al. (2008a)^7/
28.49	0.783	0.158	5.534	3.709	0.997	Franco et al. (2008a)^8/
19.51	0.743	0.118	5.114	2.151	0.566	Augostinho et al. (2008)^9/
SOURSOP TREE
12.12	- - -	0.068	1.31	0.23	0.51	Barbosa et al. (2003) ^10/

^*
1/ Rangpur lime rootstocks and ‘Pêra’ orange scion, 260 DAE; 2/ ‘Swingle’ citrumelo rootstock, 100 DAT; 3/ ‘Nota 10’ seedlings, 150 DAS; 4/ and 5/ ‘Malásia’ rootstocks, grafted on ‘B-10’ and ‘Golden Star’, respectively, 308 DAT; 6/ ‘Malásia’ rootstocks, 125 DAT; 7/ and 8/ ‘Paluma’ and ‘Século XXI’ seedlings, respectively, 120 DAT; 9/ ‘Pedro Sato’ seedlings, 120 DAT; 10/ ‘Morada’ seedlings, 195 days after transplant.

Table 3 Macronutrient doses that promoted maximum growth in rootstocks and seedlings of different species, as reported by different studies.

N	P	K	References
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - mg dm^-3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CITRUS (rootstocks)
920	100	790	Rozane et al. (2007) ^1/; Rozane et al. (2009a) ^2/
920	710	526	Ruschel et al. (2004) ^3/
CITRUS (seedlings)
459	184	876	Prado et al. (2008) ^4/
459	92	438	Prado et al. (2009) ^5/
2,592	753	2,100	Bernardi et al. (2000) ^6/
1,836	368	876	Arouca et al. (2011) ^7/
GUAVA TREE
800	257	1,452	Dias et al. (2012) ^8/; Batista et al. (2011)^9/
PASSION FRUIT TREE
150	160	300	Almeida et al. (2006) ^10/; Brasil e Nascimento (2010)^11/
340	267	300	Natale et al. (2006) ^12/; Lima et al. (2007) ^13/
-	450	220	Prado et al. (2005)^14/; Prado et al. (2004a) ^15/
PAPAYA TREE
1,625	600	-	Mendonça et al. (2009) ^16/; Vichiato et al. (2009) ^17/
UMBU TREE
286	281	208	Neves et al. (2007a) ^18/; (2007b) ^19/; (2008a) ^20/>

^*
1/ ‘Swingle’ citrumelo and 2/ rangpur lime tree, 133 days; 3/ rangpur lime tree, five months after transplanting (MAT); 4/ and 5/ ‘Valência’ orange tree on ‘Swingle’ citrumelo tree and rangpur lime tree, respectively, 424 days after sowing; 6/ ‘Valência’ orange tree on rangpur lime tree, 10 MAT; 7/ ‘Tahiti’ lime tree grafted on ‘Flying Dragon’ tree, 215 days after grafting; 8/ N, K and 9/ P in ‘Paluma’, 120 and 100 DAT, in substrate and soil, respectively; 10/ N, K and 11/ P in yellow passion fruit tree cultivated in soil, 84 DAE and 50 DAT; 12/ N, K and 13/ P in seedlings cultivated in soil, 84 DAE and 92 days after sowing; 14/ P and 15/ K in seedlings cultivated in soil, 70 and 60 days after sowing, respectively; 16/ ‘Formosa’ variety cultivated in commercial substrate, 150 days; 17/ ‘Improved Sunrise Solo 72/12’ and ‘Tainung 01’ hybrid, 120 days after sowing; 18/ N, 19/ P and 20/ K, seedlings cultivated in soil.

Table 4 Foliar content and macronutrient content range for rootstocks and seedlings of different species, as reported by different studies.

N	P	K	Ca	Mg	S	Reference
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - g kg^-1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CITRUS (rootstocks)
34.0 - 36.9	2.4 - 2.9	19.1 - 22.1	22.5 - 27.3	3.2 - 3.9	3.0 - 3.7	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^1/
34.6 - 37.3	2.3 - 2.6	18.2 - 23.4	21.1 - 24.5	3.4 - 4.0	2.9 - 3.2	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^2/
28.1 - 32.4	1.9 - 2.3	12.8 - 16.5	25.6 - 31.7	3.3 - 3.6	3.2 - 4.0	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^3/
37.8 - 41.2	2.3 - 2.8	20.0 - 22.8	24.2 - 29.9	3.5 - 4.2	3.9 - 4.3	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^4/
CITRUS (established seedlings)
32.0 - 35.7	2.0 - 2.4	21.0 - 24.2	20.8 - 26.7	2.2 - 2.5	2.9 - 3.3	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^5/
36.0 - 39.2	2.1 - 2.4	22.4 - 24.9	23.5 - 26.5	2.5 - 2.9	3.3 - 3.7	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^6/
STAR FRUIT TREE
30.0 - 33.2	2.6 - 3.1	24.7 - 33.7	12.5 - 15.1	4.2 - 5.9	3.1 - 4.0	Rozane et al. (2011a) ^7/
GUAVA TREE
24.0 - 28.0	2.4 - 3.1	21.0 - 29.0	6.0 - 8.0	1.9 - 2.9	1.9 - 2.3	Souza et al. (2015) ^8/
30.8 - 32.8	3.2 - 3.4	27.9 - 33.8	11.1	1.9 - 2.5	3.2 - 3.5	Franco and Prado (2006) ^9/
30.0 - 33.8	3.3 - 4.1	23.2 - 30.9	10.4	1.9 - 2.7	3.2 - 3.9	Franco and Prado (2006) ^10/
SOURSOP TREE
33.4	1.3	51.4	18.8	2.8	-	Barbosa et al. (2003) ^11/>
30	1.3	22.5	5.2	1.3	1.51	Silva and Farnezi (2009) ^12/
PASSION FRUIT TREE
33.0 - 44.0	4.50	32.5 - 39.9	12.8	4.0	-	Natale et al. (2006) ^13/; Prado et al. (2005) ^14/; (2004a) ^15/; (2004b) ^16/
43.4	2.47	27.4	15.6	3.8	5.28	Freitas et al. 2008 ^17/
PAPAYA TREE
47.5 - 53.7	3.1	44.4 - 52.7	15.0	11.1 - 12.3	5.5	Serrano et al. (2010) ^18/
36.5 - 43.2	2.6	35.2 - 39.4	13.0	9.6 - 9.8	5.3	Serrano et al. (2010) ^19/
40.9 - 44.3	2.6	39.9 - 44.5	11.9 - 12.0	9.9 - 11.6	4.7	Serrano et al. (2010) ^20/
39.4 - 44.9	4.4 - 5.5	45.5 - 50.1	15.0	10.5 - 11.5	5.0	Serrano et al. (2010) ^21/
42.4 - 46.1	2.5	41.4 - 47.7	15.0	11.0 - 11.4	5.1 - 5.5	Serrano et al. (2010) ^22/
UMBU TREE
25.7 - 29.5	1.5 - 1.9	3.4 - 6.0	18.3 - 21.5	2.8 - 3.3	-	Neves et al. (2007a)^23/; (2007b) ^24/; (2008a) ^25/; (2008b) ^26/

^*
1/ ‘Cleópatra’, 2/ ‘Cravo’, 3/ ‘Sunki’, 4/ ‘Swingle’; 5/ ‘Pêra’/‘Sunki’, 6/ ‘Valência’/‘Swingle’; 7/ hypobiotes grown in nutrient solution until 150 DAT (P. S.: ranges based on variation of contents as a function of the different solutions used); 8/ ‘Paluma’ cultivar grown in substrate, 120 days; 9/ ‘Paluma’ and 10/ ‘Século XXI’ cultivars grown in nutrient solution, 90 days after treatments; 11/ and 12/ ‘Morada’ cultivar, grown in soil, 150 and 120 days; 13/ N, 14/ P, 15/ K, 16/ Ca and Mg, yellow passion fruit tree, grown in soil, 84, 70, 60 and 80 days (P. S.: for N and K, the values referring to 90% of maximum production were calculated based on other studies); 17/ passion fruit tree plants obtained through hydroponic growth, 103 days; genotypes of 18/ ‘Golden’, 19/ ‘Calimosa’, 20/ ‘Incaper 09’, 21/ ‘Tainung 01’and 22/ ‘Incaper 39’ papaya cultivars, grown in substrates, 30 days after sowing; 23/ N, 24/ P, 25/ K, 26/ Ca and Mg, seedlings grown in soil.

Table 5 Foliar content and micronutrient content range for rootstocks and seedlings of different species, as reported by different studies.

B	Cu	Fe	Mn	Zn	Reference
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - mg kg^-1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CITRUS (rootstocks)
105 - 143	36.0 - 38.9	110 - 140	135 - 190	26.7 - 33.8	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^1/
65 - 120	4.6 - 7.5	113 - 211	53 - 71	20.4 - 51.3	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^2/
72 - 140	15.7 - 30.9	102 - 184	60 - 93	27.3 - 41.8	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^3/
116 - 177	20.9 - 31.3	146 - 221	153 - 243	24.7 - 35.7	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^4/
CITRUS (established seedlings)
101 - 130	9.8 - 12.0	188 - 261	90 - 146	40.8 - 61.4	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^5/
91 - 124	14.9 - 18.4	167 - 238	74 - 125	41.1 - 52.7	Bataglia et al. (2008) ^6/
STAR FRUIT TREE
69 - 81	3 - 4	116 - 144	266 - 433	35 - 46	Rozane et al. (2011a) ^7/
GUAVA TREE
35 - 48	4 - 15	68 - 93	180 - 245	31 - 60	Souza et al. (2015) ^8/
31	2	106	116	21	Franco and Prado (2008) ^9/
29	3	102	109	24	Franco and Prado (2008) ^10/
SOURSOP TREE
-	5.4	120.7	38.0	33.7	Barbosa et al. (2003) ^11/
58.2	-	-	-	22.4	Silva and Farnezi (2009) ^12/
PASSION FRUIT TREE
22.0	-	-	-	-	Prado et al. (2006) ^13/
64.0	2.25	116	80	22	Freitas et al. (2008) ^14/
PAPAYA TREE
111.9	15.0	187	79.4 - 94.9	37.7	Serrano et al. (2010) ^15/
88.3	12.8	208	61.8 - 72.8	35.5	Serrano et al. (2010) ^16/
97.7	12.1	182	60.8 - 67.6	31.8	Serrano et al. (2010) ^17/
108.1	11.1	146	66.3	67.5	Serrano et al. (2010) ^18/
113.3	11.2	145	61.2 - 70.1	47.1	Serrano et al. (2010) ^19/

^*
1/ ‘Cleópatra’, 2/ ‘Cravo’, 3/ ‘Sunki’, 4/ ‘Swingle’; 5/ ‘Pêra’/‘Sunki’, 6/ ‘Valência’/‘Swingle’ (according to the authors, Cu and Zn contents were altered as a consequence of spraying, which hindered a reliable interpretation of results for these nutrients); 7/ hypobiotes grown in nutrient solution until 150 DAT (P. S.: range based on variation of contents as a function of the different solutions used); 8/ ‘Paluma’ cultivar grown in substrate, 120 days; 9/ ‘Paluma’ and 10/ ‘Século XXI’ cultivars grown in nutrient solution, 90 days after treatments; 11/ and 12/ ‘Morada’ cultivar, grown in soil, 150 and 120 days, respectively; 13/ yellow passion fruit seedlings grown in soil, 70 days after sowing; 14/ passion fruit tree plants obtained through hydroponic growth, 103 days; genotypes of 15/ ‘Golden’, 16/ ‘Calimosa’, 17/ ‘Incaper 09’, 18/ ‘Tainung 01’and 19/ ‘Incaper 39’ papaya cultivars, grown in substrates, 30 days after sowing.

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

Evolução da nutrição mineral na formação de porta-enxertos e mudas de frutíferas

PlumX

Mensagem

[TFN0101] ^*
1/ Rangpur lime rootstocks and ‘Pêra’ orange scion, 260 DAE; 2/ ‘Swingle’ citrumelo rootstock, 100 DAT; 3/ ‘Nota 10’ seedlings, 150 DAS; 4/ and 5/ ‘Malásia’ rootstocks, grafted on ‘B-10’ and ‘Golden Star’, respectively, 308 DAT; 6/ ‘Malásia’ rootstocks, 125 DAT; 7/ and 8/ ‘Paluma’ and ‘Século XXI’ seedlings, respectively, 120 DAT; 9/ ‘Pedro Sato’ seedlings, 120 DAT; 10/ ‘Morada’ seedlings, 195 days after transplant.