Chemical control of sprouting in white potatoes

Perlasca, G.

doi:10.1007/bf02879145

Cited by 10 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The older works on potato present conflicting evidence (4,5), and there has been little clarification in recent work. Terminating dormancy in freshly harvested potatoes is an important practical problem, to which much attention has been given, and many chemical treatments have been tried (5,22). Rosa (28) was first to try ethylene; concentrations of 10,200, and 1000 ,ull were applied for 28 days giving substantial increases in the stand obtained 1 month after planting.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dual Effects of Ethylene on Potato Dormancy and Sprout Growth

Rylski¹,

Rappaport²,

Pratt³

1974

Plant Physiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dormant potato tubers (Solanum tuberosum L.) of two cultivars were treated with various concentrations of ethylene gas for various exposure periods. As has been shown by others, ethylene caused a rapid but transient increase in respiration rate, which appeared to be independent of any effects on dormancy. All concentrations tested caused accelerated sprouting, 2 microliters per liter being the most effective. Ethylene exerts a dual effect on potato tubers: it markedly shortens the duration of rest, but it inhibits elongation of the sprouts during extended treatment. Comparing these results with published work on seeds, bulbs, and corms suggests that ethylene must have a significant but as yet unexplained role in rest and dormancy. However, since the most effective ethylene treatment did not equal the response elicited by treatment with ethylene chlorhydrin, other factors must also contribute to termination of rest.The initiation of sprouting in potato tubers is accompanied by a variety of biochemical changes which are usually reflected in changes in hormonal concentration, respiration rate, and the onset of nucleic acid synthesis and cell division and enlargement (16, 21, 24-26, 30, 31). A number of reports have supported the hypothesis that the rest period in potato tubers is regulated by gibberellins and ABA (24,26,30). However, the significance of other hormones, particularly of ethylene, has not been investigated adequately.That ethylene is an endogenous growth hormone for plants and a potent growth regulator is well established (1,23), but its role in the dormancy of potatoes and other plant organs has remained unclear. The older works on potato present conflicting evidence (4, 5), and there has been little clarification in recent work. Terminating dormancy in freshly harvested potatoes is an important practical problem, to which much attention has been given, and many chemical treatments have been tried (5,22). Rosa (28) was first to try ethylene; concentrations of 10, 200, and 1000 ,ull were applied for 28 days giving substantial increases in the stand obtained 1 month after planting. On the other hand, Denny (8, 9) tried ethylene, propylene, and acetylene at 1000 and 10,000 ,lll for 4 and 7 days and found them to be ineffective. In studies by Vacha and Harvey (32), ethylene treatments with 1000 ,ul/l at 20 C for 6 days gave 'This investigation was supported in part by North Atlantic Treaty Organization Research Grant 541 to L.R.2 On leave from Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, Bet Dagan, Israel. earlier sprouting and faster growth with some potato cultivars. Rosa (29) reported further tests with ethylene, using treatments of 455 and 2500 ,ul/l for 2, 3, or 4 weeks at 22 C; the 2-and 3-week treatments inhibited sprouting, whereas a 4-week treatment promoted sprouting (no difference between the concentrations was observed). In a better planned experiment with 800 ,1/1, ethylene accelerated emergence, especially in the shorter treatments. Another experiment with 500 1ul/l g...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dual Effects of Ethylene on Potato Dormancy and Sprout Growth

Rylski¹,

Rappaport²,

Pratt³

1974

Plant Physiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(1948QUANT? ( , 1949, RHODI-S, SEXTON, SPENCER und TEMPLEMAN (1950), SCHULZE, FISCHNICH, WoLLNER und GoRSLER (1951) und FiscHNicH und Mitarbeiter (1951, 1956 halten sie fur moglich oder doch nicht fur ganz ausgeschlossen. JACOB (1952) hat dagegen bereits gewisse Bedenken geltend gemacht, und PERLASCA (1956) halt sie fur ungeeignet zur Saatgutbehandlung.…”

unclassified

“…( , 1949, RHODI-S, SEXTON, SPENCER und TEMPLEMAN (1950), SCHULZE, FISCHNICH, WoLLNER und GoRSLER (1951) und FiscHNicH und Mitarbeiter (1951, 1956 halten sie fur moglich oder doch nicht fur ganz ausgeschlossen. JACOB (1952) hat dagegen bereits gewisse Bedenken geltend gemacht, und PERLASCA (1956) halt sie fur ungeeignet zur Saatgutbehandlung. Auch die Praxis lehnt heute auf Grund mancher MifJerfolge die Anwendung der Carbamate als Kcimverzogerungsmittel fiir Ptlanzkartoffeln allgemein ab, ohne dafS damit allerdings dieses Problem als prinzipiell geklart angesehen werden konnte.…”

unclassified