Crescimento do tomateiro cultivado em solo coberto com polipropileno preto

Abstract

2RESUMO -Realizou-se um experimento para avaliar o crescimento e partição de assimilados de plantas de tomate cultivadas sob cobertura ou não do solo com polipropileno preto. O delineamento experimental foi em blocos casualizados completos, com parcelas subdivididas e quatro repetições. Nas parcelas, os tratamentos se constituíram de dois sistemas de cultivo (com e sem cobertura do solo polipropileno preto, TNT) e nas subparcelas, as épocas de amostragem das plantas: 14; 28; 42; 56; 70; 84; 98 e 112 dias após o transplantio, DAT. Foram avaliados: acúmulo de massa seca nas folhas (MSF), ramos (MSR), inflorescências (MSI), frutos (MSFR) e total (MST), área foliar (AF), razão de área foliar (RAF), taxa assimilatória líquida (TAL), taxa de crescimento absoluto (TCA) e taxa de crescimento relativo (TCR ABSTRACT -An experiment was carried out to evaluate the growth and division of treated tomato plants grown in soil covered or not with black polypropylene. The experimental design was of randomised complete blocks, in split plots and four replications. In the plots, the treatments consisted of two systems (with and without a black polypropylene TNT covering) and in the subplots, plant-sampling times of 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, 84, 98 and 112 days after transplanting (DAT). The following were evaluated: dry matter accumulation in the leaves (DML), the branches (DMB), the inflorescences (DMI), the fruits (DMFR) total dry mass (TDM), the leaf area (LA), leaf area ratio (LAR), net assimilation rate (NAR), absolute growth rate (AGR) and relative growth rate (RGR). The ground cover did not influence the DML, DMB, DMI DMFR or TDM as well as LA, LAR, NAR, AGR or RGR. The fruits behaved as preferential drain for the plant, reaching the end of the cycle with 47.77% of the total dry mass accumulation. respectively, while the RGR and NAR decreased throughout the evaluation period.

Organic compost addition to raw rice husk substrate for tomato (<i>Solanum lycopersicum</i>) hybrid variety cultivation in a leach recirculating system

“…Nevertheless, the varieties did not differ in LAI, total plant DM production or proportional DM partitioning for fruits. The fruits accounted for 58-64% of DM produced by the shoot, coinciding with the results previously obtained for other beefsteak tomato varieties Aguirre et al, 2012;Lucena et al, 2013;Soares et al, 2013). The fruits can be considered as the most powerful photoassimilate sink.…”

Biomass association in specimens and interspecific hybrids of tomatoes

“…For all genotypes, in both environments, the net assimilation rate (NAR) presented a cubic fit, reaching the maximum estimated values at approximately 34 DAT and decreasing from then on until presenting a slight increase at 84 DAT (Figure 2). As reported by Lopes et al (2011) and Soares et al (2013) for cultivated tomatoes, it is possible to state that, in this study, from 28 to 42 DAT, due to an increase in the growth of genotypes, specifically leaf area, there was a self-shading of the vegetative canopy, thus causing a decrease in NAR.…”

“…The stabilization and decrease of leaf area when approaching 84 DAT (Table 1) possibly occurred due to senescence suppressing the emergence of new leaves in most genotypes, as was also observed for tomatoes cultivated by Lopes et al (2011), Soares et al (2013), and Martinazzo et al (2015).…”

“…According to studies on the quantitative analysis of tomato growth (Lopes et al, 2011;Soares et al, 2013), we determined the following functions of LA and dry matter: absolute growth rate (AGR) = (TDM 2 -TDM 1 )/(T 2 -T 1 ) (g plant -1 day -1 ); relative growth rate (RGR) = [ln(TDM 2 ) -ln(TDM 1 )]/(T 2 -T 1 ) (g g -1 day -1 ), where ln(TDM 2 ) and ln(TDM 1 ) are natural logarithms of the TDM of two successive samplings; net assimilation rate (NAR…”

“…There are several studies based on physiological indexes reporting the growth and productivity of tomatoes cultivated under the most diverse management conditions (Fayad, Fontes, Cardoso, Finger, & Ferreira, 2001;Andriolo, Espindola, Godoi, Bortolotto, & Luz, 2004;Lopes et al, 2011;Soares, Negreiros, Lopes, Dombroski, & Lucena, 2013;Martinazzo, Perboni, Posso, Aumonde, & Bacarin, 2015;Pedó, Aumonde, Lopes, & Mauch, 2015). In contrast, little is known about the detailed quantitative physiological indexes of the growth of wild species and interspecific hybrids of tomatoes in comparison to cultivated tomatoes.…”